3 10 310 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/3a9f502870f65ee28d77a21263a93530.pdf 88e26df8d5133fce3cb39d0d9c0d6592 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Brian Anson/ARC pre and post Harrogate Subject The topic of the resource Various documents describing ARC ideas and activities See below Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1975-1976 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ARC Subject The topic of the resource Single page introduction to ARC Description An account of the resource Over the past few weeks the Architects Revolutionary Council has been publ icising its aims in the press and media and pamphletting schools, papers and magazines. Certain MP's have also been given copies of our literature. This pamphlet expands our views and puts forward our strategy to bring about the architectural revolution. We see architecture today as criminal, in as much as it is practiced against the general welfare of ordinary people in Britain. These are the people ARC members see as their peers, not the present controllers and manipulators of our environment. Because of the injustice and chaos caused by architecture and its practitioners, we feel that though our approach is similar to other revolutionary groups, our enemy is slightly different. True, architecture is oppressive, exploitive, manipulative and ignorant of peoples desires, but in its present form it is also archaic, totally archaic. .: The practitioners and bosses of architecture are virtually unaware that they are so inadequate and i1]1 educated in terms of the directions that our society is trying to progress. Unlike unwanted governments, monarchies| or military Oppressors, they are unable to conmand physical force to directly implement their dictates. These two factors, unawareness and ill-equippedness make our enemy, the architectural establishment? vulnerable, yet unpredictable. We do not know how aware our eneny is of iteelf, or of the strength and versatility of ite opponents. The RIBA has resisted any real efforts to change this situstion, openly unwilling to ednit its social insdequacy and allow the emerging social forcee to influence its dictates. A more sensitive and socially responsive Overleaf is e primary action course, that we see as the foundeticn to the newarchitecturemovementcomingtofruition.heOeeaeeOecones tecChnicians, drsusguhgthetmeemnen aand studenetsn wiSatnheingetheourparosfessrions to Gscrarec,! SOCIAL HOMICIDE REV reason behind a structure manifesting itself, in the physical form was because it was croritenie. In terms of the scale of this manifestetion the equation is simple, the bigger the practice, the bigger the building, the greater. the profit and inevitebly the greater the social disruption and destruction. OLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE The Architects Revolutionary Council is not a populist movement. Unlike a total social revolutionary group, we are primarily concerned witn radical change within our *ield of work, that being architecture and How have we managed to achieve a total reversal in the eccepted reason for the existance of architects? 4 planning. Having said that, 1t would be naive to think that our writings and activities will not effect social change, we will have failed if they ao not. We are initially concerned with the heightening of the awareness, of our colleagues, the creation of a real empathy with the users of our designs, then producing a solidarity based on whst we see as a just cause. Our cause is a just one and we are committed to instigating our policies and strategies to bring about architectural revolution. A complete evaluation of almost any building erected in the vast two or three decsdes will show,in social terms, firstly how vowerful architecture has become and secondly, how the abuse cf that power has brought sbout a destruction of our culture. Architecture has ceased to function fcr the good of people, it now functions to satisfy profits, ego's end abstract aes thetics. That is the shameful cafession architecture has to make to society, now. ARCHITECTURAL SUICIDE Public sector architecture has pernetrated a syate of ugly, dominating and vast developments in the neme oF society,in the vretence thet it is 1 *the power structure, based on the economic infrastructure, yropned un end reinforced by the media and supported by the educations] couses. The architectural profession has been instrumental in the destruction of the physical rabviec of society, when its major purpore should have been the exact opposite. Collectively the architects, technicians, draushtemen and students in the profession have either eagerly participated or silently carried cut a systematic annihilation of our great citics and many of their cultures and sub cultures‘,In many ways architecture has created more havec and destruction than the Lurtwaffe in World War Two. The only difference being that architecture has hidden behind the viel of redevelorment or rehabilitation. The war was destructive in many obvious and clearly definatle ways. Architecture has been a ict more subtle.... but make no mistake the result has been precisely the same. Germanys motives in that war were also easily identifiable ond we found them very easy to hate; their succinct eggressive nature was plain to see. Yhe reasons for the architectural force taking over the aggressors rele is not as clear, yet in the vrivate sector the answer is simply profit. Though actual. building fascades varied, irrespective of purpose or locetion, the At peony ARC is uncertsin what grounds the establishment will submit on; what its greatest weaknesses ara Also we are uncertain of its potential | towards the areas of society that need our aseistance. The RIBA is too severity in repressing the indictments we are going to make, and ite i committedto the wealthy to change its direction,without loosing Sauce and capactty to resist a real attack on its very foundation, As well e2 cur j Jeapordizing ite professional status with that section of society. This manifesto, which basically states our beliefs, it is imperative that we dependance unon architecture being profitable is ruining cur environment, riot limproving it. Architecture in ites existing form is far too svorerveent lay down certain ground rules. On achievement of the mass movement which i we are striving for, theee ground rules can be used as a future basis oF : etarting point for the new architecture movement. It is our belief, in i® pefering te the RIBA and its members as the enemy or the establishment, to the economic structure to assert its real social responsibility. Therefore we are committed to its destruction and the replecement of it with » syetem of enviromental design that takes people as its peers, not money. that there exists a distinct 'us and them’ situation in architecture and Lanning. There are those who wield the power and those who are subject o it. The wielders are the RIBA, the principles in private ‘practice and the heads of lccal government denartment:. Avle recruits for these posit- ions are always in the pipeline thanks to the educationalists who constantly feed this archaic, yet, powerful group. Obviously we are aware - thede consciences and commence wor thet this nower structure is cubscrviant te finenciers, cornoraticns and rich clients, anc cf course develomers and syecalators. This heirerchy has always been eble to rely on the technicians, partially qualified designere end drevcatemen,who make un the bulk of people in tie offices, to carry out their dictates unquestioningly. They are guilty of silent ecquiesenct, working without a »rincipled mind, ebusing their conrciences, end foregoing eny rocial morale they may heave had. The resui+ of this power abuse ond cocial disregurd, is a lousy environment, Uroun chacs, rural decay, cocinl disruption, psychological disorders...architectural suicide. : solying housing and educational problems. Most of these prcviems are partially inFated by architects and planners thinking they can disgnose a society without even coming into contact with that society. In all honesty all that architects really need to know about people is that they are mostly between four and six feet high and take up varicus amounts of space, dependant on the activity they are involved in, That has been elmost the sum totel of expertise architects have applied to their buildings in distinct human terms. Architecture has successfully reduced people to the status of a design element, to be taken into account with all the cther elements such as lighting, plumbing, car parking etc. architectural order must remove them and begin to redirect our exnertise Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/9e1c1988c729762d0725caa8e5c0ee5e.pdf 302d5ca281ae84e16fdccda4fbe424af Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Brian Anson/ARC pre and post Harrogate Subject The topic of the resource Various documents describing ARC ideas and activities See below Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1975-1976 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ARC/NAM Subject The topic of the resource Trailer for forming NAM written by ARC (2 sides) Description An account of the resource A NEW ARCHITECTURE MOVEMENT The Architects Revolutionary Council understands the need for a new architecture move- ment, and is glad to instigate it. ARC has no intention of becoming a mass movement itself. eae The new architecture movement will. be seriously coneerned with the social responsibil- ityofarchiteancdttsheframeworkinwhicharchitectureispractised. ARChopesto bringa moral and social consciencieto the. architectural profession, —It. hopes to end architecturaes anelitist profession and directly relate architectsto those who need them the mosthe'p—eop-le. e pa - oe TM a Below are just some af the reasons for forming a new architecture movement:- 1. To create a.situation where architects work for the real clients, the users. “This can only be achieved if the users become the. clientt with the control of the capital “for projects. Decentralisation of power and increased democracy are essential concepts of this direction and architects should play an active role in obtaining them. But as individuals, architects have no power, because they are controlled by the providers. of the resources for projects, When architects combine they have only limited power which is quickly shatterebdy the non-esséntiality of their position in society, Thus archi- tects have to gain public support for ‘socialising their task, to be able to exert any worthwhile pressure, With this:in mind, anew movement could aim at putting architects talents at thédisposaolf the public and because this idea is truly in:‘the interests: ée To make architectural services available to all: sectors of society. At present the architectural profession works for just two areas of society, firstly the rich minority and ‘the powers of industry, ¢ommerce and finance: secondly, for local or national government bureaucracies, ‘distant from the public they vainly try to serve.: The majority of the, population has:never had access to the architectural profession and so have been restricted in improving the quality of their environment. The self help attitcaundoenly help afewpeople, while:an architectural service could help ; those without the time or resources of their om. The national health service was not’ TM created by doctors orpatientosn their own, but only came about when enough pressure was brought on the government to.create it... Similarly, neither architects nor the publicontheirowncancreatean-architecsteruvircea’lth.ateffectivelydealswith all the ills of our: present enyironment. A new architecture movement will have to be responsible for’ taking action with the government, eS 3. So that peopie may control their environment. At the moment people have insuffi- cient control of their environment in terms of planning and the use of resources, The Green Paper on Neighbourhood Councils now passing through Parliament gives only limited participation to the people and by its lack of power reduces these Councils to purely - advisory bodies easily over-ruled. Action must be taken with the government to give real power to the Neighbourhood Councils. : a of the public it is capable of mobilising public support. 4. The environmental professions should be subjecto the democratic control of the public. In 1938 the Architects Registration Act came into being, due to the pressure from the RIBA to create atlegal closed shop for the profession, while the Government's responsibility for'‘the public was sufficed by protecting them from sham architects, In today's society of worker control, user democracy and public accountability, the Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom is obviously unacceptable. ARCUK must be reconstituted by Parliament to ensure that the public has adequate con- trol of the architectural profession, 5« Architectural education should be controlled by a body equally representative of the public, the profession, the teachers and the students. At present architectural education is controlled by the RIBA, a private club, through its Board of Hiucation, which has powers of recognition. Thus the public pays for an architectural education over which it has no control, to produce architects over which it has no control, to create bad environments it can do nothing about. A reconstituted ARCUK could operate a new democratic Board of Architectural Education, 7.TheRIBAisnotaGroenessiveodyre biefaistriedto-createchange within the arch: Sectural pr: féssion through RIBA is glad to absorb prog: essive ideas and people, in an attempt to‘portray an out; ward looking front;; but in reality to smother: ‘people and thei? ideas in tedious tees and length: red tape. The result: being: to sO impotent aS ~o be harmless to the con tinuarice architecture movement must .ot be a stagnant: tedious body, but vital, ‘flexible and ever RORPPRRENS 30. the chan» ing needs: and ideals of progressivé’ ‘people. The first. Fine tine had oeite the need the great inadecuacies of the RIBA,. Pogether |Shey ‘reveal ‘somie of the ote behind forming a new architecture novement. gm nabs ‘Onceanewarch:secturemovment.hasgaindda*Romthiebdieihein~apaiutecbarad arena, it can begin to gain ‘the Support, of|the,“public in. accomplishing its objectives, The finest: stage xhLong. this’ ¥dad. will be, to." found ay‘movement at a. mation conference “ye ro all, intereste, apartiess.< oh ARC hopes that iis résponsi® le role . Jaiaiei s is nde in ‘|foree anything’ben enyhase:-we melee baeay onitaoian,and ee weabhor “dogmatism. ° We-would. be grat >ful’ for. as — a2: help as the RIBA, most ‘have totally. failed. The commits tire people out and*make their ideas of: the RIBA'ts status quo. Anew ° for, Government. action, while the last two show we are. noetibhe ‘in’ tig, and: are not asking for hélp, CONFERENCE TORMING A NEW. AROHTTEOTURE MOVEMENT 78s FRIDAY NC) 21st 3pm“to SUNDAY.“Ov cae Same pele _TARROGCADE. 7Pait lew3 eee tes becainad to 6. So that the RIBA's preicnce at speaking as the "voice of architecture" ends, The RIBA is effectively control'.ed by a small group of principal architects, and its "voice" is stroigly in line with their own minority interests. Most of the group belong to the Association oc Consultant Architects, a private practice organisation. Evidence for this is the RI7A's determination to save the fixed fee scale - now under attack by the Mcnopolies Comission: their lack of interest in the dangers exposed by the Summerland Fire and the use of high-alumina cement: their reluctance to expose in- competantandcorruptarchivects.<Anew eee.movementmust.Ceeforall.that is socially responsible in eee See! 35F to get as many -Foople’ as possible to the conference, to make contzibutions, to help withtheconferecemesheseenoeeeceecnestomakeSimoisesumeoeeeeete : ehact : Bogking and ’info: nation fro! od desc a RE ae: ae NAM, 10. Borey, Street, “Lendon w, * 041-636-0798 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated c Nov 1975 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/c330f007457c4f3b19dd75d70b4ee612.pdf 051d6557eccb7084072855ce73d99cf4 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Introduction and Origins Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ARC/NAM Meeting Subject The topic of the resource Report of ARC/NAM meeting 29 July 1976 Description An account of the resource ARC/NAM meeting. Thursday 29th, July 1976. John Murray, John Allen and David Roebuck met with the full ARC sroup to discuss in a general way the present position of the two srouns and their plans for the future. ARC began by outlining a three point programme; The build-up of REDHOUSE as a propoganda weapon. Development of the large Colne Valley community vroject. A Summer School for 1977 probably preceded by a large congress early in the year. NAM is organising a November Congress and is awaiting the repercussions of it's submission to the Monopolies Commission; NAM's report had been well recieved. It is now clear that the strategic objectives of the two grouyxs are guite different; this also affects their style. ARC will logically continue it's ‘guerilla’ campaign and aim to be a continual thorn in the side of the establishment. Complimenting this it will develone it's community design work. NAN, on the other hand is in the 'numbers game', that is building a mass movement. Logically the organisational structure of the two groups is also totally different, ARC being tightly knit with it's members taking specific roles, eg. Director of Policy, Pronoganda, National Organisor etc. NAM is developing quickly as a decentralised organisation. Given these facts the conclusions drawn at the meeting were; Co-operation is possible providing each group recognises and respects the 'differing' role of the other in the common struggle. ie. A community architecture in our society. The groups should support at every opportunity the actions of each other. Using the media for such support. The grooups can aid each other in the organisation of their respective congresses. NAM can use REDHCUSE for it's own vropoganda purvoses and may consider a major spread. Both groups would keep very strong contact to develope other forms of co-operation. Brian Anson. Director of Policy for AR 30th. July 1976. NAM would logically play a major role in the ARC Summer School of 1977. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brian Anson Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 30 July 1976 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/2d10265b4f3796b93f5e09b658527076.pdf ec7c87c56f65afc983a2fdb1c670df1d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Trade Unions and Architecture Description An account of the resource Themes included action on asbestos and Health &amp; Safety, and involvement with Direct Labour Organisations and Building Unions. Following comparative research of possible options, NAM encouraged unionisation of building design staffs within the private sector, negotiating the establishment of a dedicated section within TASS. Though recruitment was modest the campaign identified many of the issues around terms of employment and industrial relations that underpin the processes of architectural production. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects building movement Subject The topic of the resource Report on NAM and Unionisation conference 1p in Science for People No 36 Description An account of the resource SPECIAL ONE-DAY CONFERENCE ON TRADE UNION ORGANISATION IN ARCHITECTURE & ALLIED BUILDING PROFESSIONS Held at St. Pancras Church Hall, Lancing St., London NW1 May 14 1977 REPORT The conference was attended by 61 participants holding full voting credentials. Of these 40 were employees in the private sector building professions(1l were women) The morning session was given over to debating which one union building design employees should organise within and culminated in the following resolutions:- Resolution 1 This conference urges all people employed in private sector offices in the building professions where no union is recognised to organise within AUEW-TASS and pledges its support to such an organising drive within AUEW-TASS Resolution 2 This Conference reqests the (Unionisation) Organising Committee, if it is willing, to make whatever arrangements are necessary with the union chosen by this conference in order to launch an organising drive among employees in the private sector of the building professions, to issue press statements in the name of this conference, and in general to carry out the will of this conference until such time as the appropriate trade union structures are fully established. The conference is to elect from the floor five additional members to the Committee. The Committee shall have the power to co-opt members. Resolution 3 The Committee is to convene a conference within six months to discuss progress in unionisation in London & nationally. This conference is to involve workers in the private and public sectors to discuss pay, conditions and the state of the building industry. Six members wre nominated for the Committee, from the floor and these were all accepted onto the Committee with- out a vote. This Committee is now known as the 'May 14 Unionisation Committee' Gont/eee Contt/s1-1- The address to contact is:- The Secretary 4 Highshore Road Peckham London SE15 5AA Before lunch the vote was taken and counted. The decision was overwhelmingly for AUEW-TASS The afternoon was devoted to wide ranging informal debate on the various issues on which the organising drive should focus, including pay and conditions, workloads, contracts of employment, and the disparity in earnings between public and private sector employees. There was also considerable feeling that a union of Arch- itectural workers should go beyond the bread and butter issues, important as they are, and tackle wider environ- mental concerns, professional accountability, resisting anti-social developments etc. Policies on such matters would no doubt be formulated both by the NAC and of course by fraternal NAM groups. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Unionisation Committee Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 1977 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/7223918d48bb1eedf0b46513dc5c6817.pdf f4f2d73d3a80dda0399fa3de214bcda4 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/e6018730d4c19465ef98acc6a0586ce4.pdf fcd5b57d2d8bf7b1d629598abd637f65 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Trade Unions and Architecture Description An account of the resource Themes included action on asbestos and Health &amp; Safety, and involvement with Direct Labour Organisations and Building Unions. Following comparative research of possible options, NAM encouraged unionisation of building design staffs within the private sector, negotiating the establishment of a dedicated section within TASS. Though recruitment was modest the campaign identified many of the issues around terms of employment and industrial relations that underpin the processes of architectural production. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects code of employment Subject The topic of the resource Article in RIBA Journal Description An account of the resource = a 1% ai, Sree . fae ie t The architect's code of employment The guidance notes on the facing page are the heart of the code of employment which salaried members have been seeking from the RIBA through the work of its salaried architects’ working group. They will be supplemented in due course by a model contract of employment, which the Major advance for profession says Maurice McCarthy Salaried architects are as concerned as are principals with the standards of architecture. Delegates at the RIBA salaried architects’ congress in October 1972 clearly recognised that, if members wanted better status in the community, they had to prove that they were worthy of public esteem by the excellence of their work, and by their concern for the social consequences of their buildings. In order to practise effectively, itis usual for architects to form themselves into groups, often in large organisations or offices and involving an employer/employee relationship. In recent years, an increasing number of members have considered that conditions of employment in many organisations and offices were obstructing a professional approach, and that this was detrimental to architecture. It was their desire to prevent further erosion of the professional judgement and skill of architects, and to increase their professional responsibility, that motivated the preparation of these guidance notes. To acknowledge, as the notes do, the fact that the majority of architects are employed is a significant advance. Although it may seem incredible that it has taken so much time and effort to achieve, the RIBA is, as far as is known, the first institute to take ot 18| SAWG is now preparing. The added to the RIBA code of notes, which were approved by Council at its April meeting, are intended to help the interpretation of the two new clauses — on members’ duties to their clients and the public, and the mutual obligations of employee and employer architects — which were this step. On this, as on other issues, architectural bodies in other countries look to us for a lead. The guidance notes are equally applicable to the private and public sectors, and do not preclude the development of new forms of practice. They should bring the standards of the majority of organisations much nearer those of the best, to the mutual benefit of employers and employees. They are by no means radical proposals. For many, they will be useful mainly asa - check list of good practice. Like all that is totally new, they will disturb some for going too far, and will disappoint others for not going far enough. It is important to remember that the notes will be strengthened by a model contract of employment and supporting information on conditions of service appropriate to architects. The latter aspects of guidance, which Council has authorised the salaried architects’ working group to prepare, will be included in the Handbook of architectural practice and management, and will deal with the important issues of pensions and insurance. The practice notes on job titles and descriptions [March RIBAJ, p 55], on redundancy [April RIBAJ, pp 5-6], and on ‘Salaried partners’ [see pp 20-21] have now been published. Together, these measures go a long way toward implementing the Institute’s policy, described in the ‘action programme’ last year, of ‘providing effective support to members throughout their careers in all sectors of the profession, so that they can fulfil their professional aspirations and responsibilities’. There are, of course, questions that conduct last month (see April Journal pp 5—6), and they will be included in the next revision of the code. Below, Maurice McCarthy introduces the notes and describes their objectives, while lan Rawling argues that they should have been tougher remain to be tackled. Possibly the most urgent of these is agency labour. Others include the investigation of patterns of recruitment, the examination of the remuneration and career structure in each sector of the profession, and the determination of desirable organisation structures through the study of existing patterns of practice. Council is pledged to action on these issues, and preliminary results can be expected during the forthcoming session. The President is writing to the chief architects of all public offices and commercial organisations, the chief executives of those offices without a chief architect, and private practice principals, to encourage them to implement the guidance notes and the principles that lie behind them. When considering the notes, members should bear in mind that their conduct should be based on a concern to advance architecture and to enhance the reputation of the profession. Could have been much tougher says lan Rawling The mere fact that the April RIBA Council unanimously passed the new guidance notes on architect employer/ employee relations isanotable milestone in the Institute’s history. It is, however, a measure of the generally nervous reaction to the question of these relationships that ithas taken two years to get from the first report of the salaried architects’ working group to the present guidance notes, RIBAJ May 1974 Timber confidence with PROTIM PREVAC begins By specifying Protim Prevac you can meet the highest specifications in the pre-treatment of building timbers, and the standard of treatment can be verified by analysis. You can specify with confidence because the timber carries a certificate of treatment. You know that the timber is treated with Protim preservatives in a double vacuum/ pressure process to ensure proper penetration and permanent protection against fungal and insect attack. You have precise control over the treatment to suit any purpose. Water repellent can be included. You have no problems with grain-raising or distortion since the treatment is water-free. The treated timber is dry and clean to handle — and fully compatible with paints, glues and mastics. Is Protim Prevac readily available? Yes —-through over eighty leading processing companies throughout Britain. ae | A Fosroc eietieciree tureld Protim and Pratim Prevac are registered trade marks Please send me a copy of your booklet: Protim Prevac \ Double Vacuum Impregnation ofBuilding Timbers and list of Protim Prevac processors. Name Position RIBA/S5/74 | Protim Ltd., Fieldhouse Lane, Marlow, Bucks. SL71LS | Rey RIBAJ May 1974 A42 PROTIM LTD., Fieldhouse Lane, Marlow, Bucks. SL7 1LS Telephone:Marlow (STD Code 06284) 6644. Telex: 847057 Compeny [laude foritwasintheoriginalreportthatthe Theguidance tain and advance their competence by majority of points were raised. participating in continuing education. While saying this may seem a little hard on some past and present Council members who have been well aware of the problems of employee architects in their relations with those colleagues who are their employers, it has seemed to me that many Council members put far more emphasis on architects’ practices than on architectural practices, as applied to all members of the Institute. In the end, the notes do no more than restate in the main some of the already established policies of the Institute. It is a disappointing outcome to so much work and effort put in by both employer and employee members of the salaried architects’ working group. The main criticism that I heard in the branches of the original ‘code of employment’ [published in the August RIBAJ 1973], which was accepted and referred to branches with barely a murmur by Council in June 1973, was “So what ?’?Members considered itso innocuous as to be almost pointless, the requirements being so loosely drawn that all but the most outrageously unprofessional offices could claim to comply with them. 5 An employing architect should permit the architects he employs to engage in sparetime practice, but an architect should not do so without the knowledge of his employer, and should ensure that there can Imust admit tomy own faultinthis, inthatasamember oftheoriginal working group Ibelieved that itwas necessary not only to balance both sides, but to be seen plainly not to create a‘them and us’ situation. Ican only assume that this ‘balanced’ view was taken as a lack of conviction, because one result of the four month delay,resultingfromtheDecember1973 practiceorelectstostayinsalaried Council resolution to have the proposals vetted by an ‘ad hoc’ committee chaired by the President, was the removal of the one really constructive item in the code: the discouragement of agency labour. The acceptance of a professional ‘lump’ betrays the principle now incorporated in the code of conduct recognising professional obligations [see April RIBAJ, pp 5—6]. The problems of using footloose ‘lump’ labour on the site are well known to anyone who has had to condemn their work, and the dangers to architectural practices are well recognised by those insurance companies which either heavily load or refuse any indemnity insurance to firms using agency staff. The omission from the guidance notes of any discouragement of agency labour can only benefit those practices which accept more work than they have staff for — to the detriment of other practices and, of course, the membership in general. Of other items which members asked for in the notes, and which are inexplicably missing, the most obvious is the need for decent transferable pensions, which can form the basis for secure retirement whether one goes on to found one’s own employment. With the advent of compulsory national graduated retirement pensions, it is even more essential for staff not in private schemes that all practices should provide a pension scheme which can stay with the insured employee throughout his working life, certainly throughout private practice and, ideally, all types of practice. The ABS has gone some way toward providing such a scheme, but not far enough. Life insurance is another important area where strong guidance should have been given to members. It is the practice of all local authorities and, I believe, the majority of private practices to insure the life of members of staff while on office business. This should be a standard provision of all practices, for while the odds are fairly long on architects being killed on site, they are much shorter for road accidents; and since so many architects have to travel widely, life insurance is essential for staff. The benefit from such insurance should be three times the annual salary before tax at the time of death. A simple basic scheme like this would overcome the effects of inflation, which usually hits hardest those least able to cope with it. RIBAJ May 1974 notes... The term ‘employing architect’ used in these be no conflict of interest between his notes means the principal or partners in a private practice, the chief architect of a public authority, or the chief architect of any industrial or commercial organisation. Where the chief architect is not the employer in a Strict sense, he is asked to do all he can to ensure that the conditions of employment of the architects working with him do not depart from these principles. Non architect employers are asked, in the interests of good architecture, to ensure that the conditions of his responsibilities to his attention is drawn to the sparetime practice in the employment of any architects they employ 8 An architect who employs students do not depart from these principles. should cooperate with the RIBA and schools 1 An employing architect should define the of architecture in the practical training terms of employment,* authority, responsi- scheme; should provide as varied experi- bility, and liabilityt of the architects he ence as possible compatible with his pro- employs, having regard to the particular responsibilities of project architects. 2 An employing architect should ensure that the architects he employs are enabled to exercise their professional skills, and should provide them with opportunities to accept progressively greater delegated authority and responsibility in accordance with their ability and experience. fessional responsibilities; and should allow student employees to take reasonable time off for academic purposes leading to the qualifying examinations. >= Where an architect is unable to comply with the guidance given in this practice note, or where he has any doubt as to the intentions of an item, or where any problem arises, he should report the facts to the Institute. 3 The participation and responsibility of project architects should be appropriately recognised by the employing architect and supporting information on conditions—of credit given (for example, in any literature, service appropriate to architects, is being description, or illustration). 4 To benefit the competence of the whole + A separate practice note will deal with profession, an employing architect should the differing aspects of liability in the private and public sectors. Finally,Ibelievethat,inprinciple, architects’ salaries should be related to the cost of living, increasing whenever the latter crosses a 4 per cent threshold. This would overcome the hypocrisy of ‘merit’ rises which do not keep pace with prices, and enable them again to be a true measure of a firm’s appreciation of its staff. None of these items which I consider essential to the guidance notes is revolutionary: they are all a feature of good architect employer/employee agreements. It might be said that, since the notes are only ‘guidance’, their inclusion would have little effect on bad employers. This might be so, but at least staff would have a recognised scale against which to measure their own conditions. And surely it is not asking too much that the code of professional conduct, which governs relations between members and practices, should state what consideration members can expect from their fellow professionals in employer/employee relationships. Maurice McCarthy, who is in the GLC architect’s department, is the chairman of the salaried architects’ working group. Tar. Rawiling, formerly a member of the group, works in the Birmingham city architect’s department. enable the architects he employs to main- employment and client. [Members’ practice note on June RIBAJ 1963.] 6 An employing the architects he employs to enter archi- tectural competitions, but an architect should not do so without the knowledge of his employer. 7 Whenever possible, an employing archi- tect should enable the architects he employs to have reasonable time off to participatein the affairs of the profession. architect should permit * A model contract of employment, with prepared by the-salaried-architects?.2roup: ~ This practice note is issued with the approval of the RiBA Council. It follows a recom- mendation from the professional conduct committee arising from cases of professional misconduct heard and determined during 1973, where the ethical responsibilities of so staffcanbedescribedasassociateswhereit conductofthepracticeisnotamatterfor is made clear that they are not partners in bargaining. All member partners are fully any sense, the use of the designation responsible for the professional conduct of “associate partner’ of an employee, however called ‘salaried partners’ were in question the unintended consequence that the Moreover, a member would not be entitled esteemed or senior, must be avoided. Any use of the term ‘partner’ in reference to an ‘associate’ or other employee could lead to the practice, and it is incumbent on each of them to be careful to make and keep himself and his partners properly informed of partnership affairs. [September RiBaj 1973, p 434). It replaces employee in question would be liable for to be relieved of responsibility for pro- the practice notes on partnership in the the contracts and torts of the practice as if fessional misconduct in connection with the he were truly a partner (see further below). partnership business merely because his May, June, and July riBas 1966. It is important that members should take partners decided in a manner otherwise Summary: A member must not use the their own legal advice as to the details of term ‘partner’ in connection with his own partnership agreements. This practice note practice or the practice in which he is does not purport to state the law of partner- employed, unless there is a relationship of ship, or the law of taxation as it relates legally valid under the partnership agree- ment not to accept a proposal for preven- tion or remedy. Nor does the joint responsibility of the partners for the conduct of the practice as a whole diminish the responsibility of a member who is an employee for anything in which he himself has a part. Associates: It must be appreciated that serious and unintended consequences may result from the appointment of ‘associates’ ifcare isnot taken to make itclear that they are not intended to be partners in any sense. joint responsibility appropriate to partners in practice as architects. The term ‘salaried partner’ is not to be used (save where unavoidable for the purposes of income tax and the like). The joint responsibilities of architects in practice as partners are of two kinds: ethical, in respect of which no partner can disclaim or fail to exercise or deny to another the participation sufficient for full professional responsibility; and business, in respect of which unequal decision making arrangements can subsist between partners if they so agree. For the purpose of these two kinds of responsibility, partners must have access to financial and other information affecting the business and conduct of the practice. Legal position: The responsibilities and liabilities of a ‘salaried partner’ are not defined in law, and depend on the agree- ment made between the persons concerned. It was recently held in a legal action by an accountant for a share in the distribution of the partnership assets of a firm of account- to partnerships. Professional relationships: A person who does not participate in the conduct of a partnership, but who appears to others to be a partner, may be legally liable as a partner to those who have dealings with the firm; but the RIBA believes that professional practice demands more than mere legal liability. A member who is a partner is considered by the RIBA to have a responsibility to clients, and to the profession and to others who may be affected, for the manner in which names appear on letterheads, they are the affairs of the practice are conducted, and he must therefore participate in the affairs of the practice accordingly. This responsibility has two aspects, one ‘associates’. Many firms list associates at relating to business decisions and the other the foot rather than at the head of their to matters which affect the professional stationery, and this practice is commended. conduct of the practice. An unequal distribution of financial risk and profit by agreement between partners may be matched by an unequal share in determining the business decisions of their practice; but all partners in a member’s For associates, a mere exchange of letters between employer and employee, clearly setting out the terms of the appointment, is sufficient, and the intention of the parties is less likely to be misinterpreted. Unless care is taken, a person who intended ants [Stekel v Ellice, 1973] that it was practice must have adequate participation to accept the position of associate may necessary to look at the substance of the in the control of the partnership business. unwittingly find himself regarded as a relationship between the parties on the This includes sharing in decision making partner with the responsibilities which flow and having access to documents and to the from that. Though principals may be better banking accounts and other financial placed to see that this does not happen, facts of any case in question. In the June RIBAS 1966, it was stated that a salaried partner properly so called is presented to the public as a full partner, no distinction between salaried and other partners being drawn on letterheads or in the Register of business names, and that he bears the same liability toward the public as the other partners. The RIBA now considers that the expression ‘salaried partner’ is undesirable in connec- tion with an architect’s practice, and requires members not to use it of architects or of any partner or employee of a practice which includes the practice of architecture (save where unavoidable for the purposes of income tax and the like, though the partner- ship arrangements are otherwise in accord- ance with this note). It must also be pointed out that, though 20 information. there is an equal obligation on principals and employee associates to see that the details of their appointment represent the A so called ‘salaried partner’ excluded from such participation is effectively no more than an employee of the firm, and the responsibilities and duties of the post. relationship of the sole principal or of the true partners with him would be that of employer and employee. His name must therefore not appear on the firm’s letter- heading or otherwise as if he were a partner of any kind. The r1BaA’s view does not disallow arrange- ments whereby a partner is remunerated solely by fixed and regular payment, whether or not called a salary, if so agreed within the partnership, whether for a pro- bationary period or otherwise. Ethical responsibility:A member’s responsi- bility as a partner for the professional Professional misconduct: It would be derog- atory to the professional character of a member, and inconsistent with his member- ship of the RBA, if in his practice or employment he were to hold out or use the name of another person, or hold himself out or allow himself to be held out, or use his name or allow his name to be used, in letterheading or otherwise, as a partner where the elements of true partnership indicated above were absent. It would, moreover, be inconsistent with membership oftheRIBAifamember entered into a partnership agreement under which RIBAJ May 1974 Care must be taken that, when associates’ clearly separated from those of the full partners, and that their name or names are clearly prefaced by the word ‘associate’ or s _PRACTICE NOTE: partners, ‘salaried partners’, and ‘associates’ member specialising in a subject, will automatically produce a greater number of well informed spokesmen to represent the views of Council. It could well make Council’s work far more interesting for a greater number of members. So far as I can see, the organisation now suggested should not involve any undue increase in administrative expenditure, but Ihave asked the Honorary Treasurer to investigate the matter. It has already been made clear that, if inflation continues at the present level, more money will eventually be needed. An undertaking has been given that subscriptions will not be raised until 1975: it must be honoured. In the normal course of events, in order to raise subscriptions in 1975, Council would not start the statutory process until March 1974. I propose to ask the Honorary Treasurer and the Finance Committee to start this process as soon as possible, on the clear understanding that, ifinflation ishalted or substantially reduced and the increases prove unnecessary, then they will not be brought into effect. I have given thought to the staff arrangements necessary to deal with the reorganisation: some changes will be necessary, and these will be finalised by the October Council. I am satisfied that they will give us not only a greater degree of flexibility, but also a more acceptable arrangement for general administration. If at the end of the two years we are able to show that we have achieved our five objectives, then we will have real hope of gaining the active support of the silent majority of members, and the Institute should benefit to the full from the foundations so ably laid by my predecessor. Should Council wish to approve these proposals, it will be necessary to pass the following resolutions : 1 To approve the general arrangements described here. 2 To establish the following boards with the number of Council members and coopted members as shown below. Policy Board: total members 13, Council members 13. Finance & House Board: total members 6, Council members 6. Membership Board: total members 12, Council members 7, coopted members 5. Library Board: total members 8, Council members 4,coopted members 4. Education Board: total members 22, Council members 14, coopted members 8. Public Affairs Board: total members 12, Council members 9, coopted members 3. European Affairs Board: total members 7, Council members 4, coopted members 3. International Relations Board: total members 7,Council members 4, coopted members 3. Practice Board: total members 16, Council members 12, coopted members 4. Professional Conduct Board: total members 7,Council members 4,coopted members 3 (past members of Council only). An appendix to the paper suggested initial appointments to the various boards and their groups for the 1973-74 session. Council approved, with one or two revisions. The names have been omitted here for reasons of space, but they will appear in the September RIBAS. Draft code of employment Council paper This code of employment is an interim proposal from the salaried architects working group, which was asked by Council last December to prepare a draft that could be used as the basis for future work. The group hopes that its publication will attract the widest possible debate before December, when it reports back to Council. The Council debate is reported on p 369 The object of the code is to promote the highest ethical standards concerning employment for the mutual benefit of both the employer and the employee by defining their mutual obligations and responsibilities. Principles An employer and employee have mutual obligations and responsibilities toward each other. An employer should have due regard to the capabilities and professional development, status, and responsibilities of architects, together with their terms of service and working conditions. An architect shall have due regard to the professional interests of his employer and their joint responsibilities to their clients, fellow professionals, and the public. 7 An architect who receives continuing education at the expense of his employer should consider his moral responsibility to apply the knowledge gained to the benefit of the employer. 8 An employer should provide architects with professionally suitable conditions of service, and reward them fairly. 390 RIBAJ August 1973 1 An architect should uphold the principles in his relationship with his professional colleagues to whom he may delegate authority and responsibility, or 10 An architect should be employed from whom he may receive delegated authority and responsibility. 2Anemployer should ensure that architects are enabled to exercise their professional skills in all circumstances. 3 An employer should define the roles, authority, liabilities, and responsibilities of architects working for his firm or organisation. 4 An employer should provide opportunities for architects to progressively accept greater delegated authority and responsibility in accordance with their ability and experience. 5 An employer should enable architects to maintain and advance their competence by encouraging and supporting their continuing education. 6 An architect should ensure that he maintains and endeavours to advance his competence by encouraging a continuing education for himself and others. directly by those from whom he may receive delegated authority and responsibility, and not by an agency. 9 An employer should employ architects directly, and not from an agency. 11 An employer should permit an architect to enter architectural competitions or engage in spare time practice. 12 An architect should not enter architectural competitions or engage in spare time practice without the knowledge of his employer. 13 An architect should consider his moral responsibilities to his current employer as well as his legal responsibility under his contract of employment when contemplating change of employment. 14 An architect should be encouraged to participate in professional activities. 15 An employer should ensure that credit is given in any literature, description, or illustration of a building, in so far as it is possible, to the architect or architects responsible for it. <-> formula — usually so that a nice, neat, rectangular shape is obtained. During this process, the site will probably not even be visited. Often this method leads to long and costly delays in public inquiries and compulsory acquisitionof properties. Naturally, itisalways the underprivileged in the community who suffer: commercial properties, even when they are almost derelict, are usually rejected as alternatives to houses,sincecommercialinterests are always more powerful. Design information Standardisation can greatly benefit building design when it is used sensibly, but it must never be allowed to take command. Today, al architects accept a degree of standardisation: even the most ‘traditional’ building uses mostly industrialised products (eg, machine made bricks and tiles, timber sizes, window sections, ironmongery, and sanitary fittings), and the different ways ofputtingthesetogethercouldhardlybe termed ‘traditional’ in the prewar sense. No architect wants to design his own door furniture or metal window sections as he once did, yet few would term this a limitation on design freedom. The freedom that he must have, however, is freedom of choice among a wide range of products on the market. He must stil remain in control of the end result, and he must never feel that standardisation has taken over and is forcing him to compromise the best solution. performance criteria for each component or design element in the building. The results could be made available to every architect in the form of design manuals or standard drawings. Again, these exist in a crude form at the moment: they must, however, be seen to provide information of the highest quality and be constantly reviewed as new information becomes available. There is now, for example, much talk about ‘vandalism’ in school buildings. Hall was a hive of activity as senior officers tried to pacify local authority chief architects who were part of the consortium, and who wanted to know whether this meant that the GLC was withdrawing from Mace. The head of the ILEA was also asking awkward questions This ‘leak’ was for ever afterward used by management to try and destroy the idea of participation, and to indulge in filibustering and equivocation in subsequent meetings. It showed that disgruntled architects could not be ‘trusted’ to keep ‘domestic internal meetings’ to themselves: that they wouldn't in fact play the management game. But at that so called ‘domestic’ meeting, management had bluntly refused to discuss several important subjects which they termed ‘confidential’. So much for trust The schools division wanted to determine what was meant by ‘participation’ and to draft a constitution for management to consider. Each group elected a representative and held ‘grass Right/far right Existing and proposed ways of organising work: printed in Acid — the magazine published by the architecture club roots’ discussions. Meetings of group representatives then thrashed out an alternative departmental structure which incorporated a mild form of participation. Management meanwhile drew up its Own proposals It was clear that there was conflict about the meaning and extent of participation right from the start. Management saw it merely as consultation on matters that weren't fundamental to the work of the division. In their view, a small group of representatives would discuss items selected by Management and appoint working parties to carry out specific tasks. Management would be present and would have the power of veto on any subject it did not agree with. If divisional meetings were held, they would be outside office hours and no votes could be taken The architects in the division, on the other hand, wanted to play down the power of group representatives, because the existing system of group leaders’ meetings had demonstrably failed to pass on the criticisms and proposals of those on lower levels. They wanted asystem whereby representatives were elected by groups to carry forward the members’ requirements to a steering committee, whose sole function would be to form agenda for divisional meetings: it would itself have no executive power. The agenda would then be put to divisional meetings and voted on after debate Obviously, there were limits to the range of decisions that this sort of participatory structure could cope with, and they would be confined to divisional matters. Itwas necessary to establish what the limits were to decisions taken by divisional meetings: to distinguish where action could be taken directly as a result of voting, for example, and where voting merely made known the division’s feelings There was also disagreement within the division on how action might be implemented. Some felt that management's job was to manage and that the division should merely tell them its democratic views and expect them to act accordingly. Others felt that managerial functions should be shared among everyone, so that each architect would be involved and the division's talent exploited to the full: it would be too easy to sit back and let someone else ‘do Participation’ for you But there was unanimous agreement that the main task was to end the pernicious system whereby important policy decisions were made in secret, and to ensure better communication between everyone concerned Negotiations were still in progress when| left the GLC, but the job architects are at a grave disadvantage in that they have nothing to bargain with: they are really at the mercy of Management's good intentions. Roger Walters has recently made public statements to the effect that there isdemocratic Participation within the GLC architect's department, but there has been little evidence of RIBAJ August 1973 BANC K—— Edvcanced Jrecnitecr> goLicy. Decisions Joe aewiTETS Assitnuts Stuscnts earl WithinanorganisationliketheGLC,this Oneconstantlyhears(usuallyatthird process of putting together existing components and products and purpose designed elements could be greatly systematised and rationalised to give architects more time for design. Good information about preferred products and materials should be centralised so that the right choice can be made quickly. The mechanism for this already existsintheGLCintheformofthe materials section and scientific branch, but the quality of information is often poor, inappropriate, or unreliable. Design standards: There is also a need foradevelopmentgroupineach division which would establish hand) how children have wantonly destroyed this or that in a school. But is italways totally wilful, or isitperhaps caused by bad design? Any group of kids going through a door will kick it, swing on it, push their neighbour into it, and much more —it is natural for them to behave like this, and stupid to try to stop them. The effect on the door may betermed ‘vandalism’, butitisreally because it has not stood up to ‘normal’ use. A centralised development group could study such problems and evolve guides to design which would recommend, for example, the right construction, choice, Soteons nechitecr GROoRS STEERING EROuPS AND — WORKING PARTE MANAGEMENT GRouP DINISTONAD MEETING real change iN i +O3| 9000 0000 nd fixing of ironmongery, hinges, and nish. There might be several standard designs which incorporated these features but were different in their cost limits. Designers would be free either to design their own doors in accordance with the strict criteria established by the group, or to use oneof the standard designs. The standard drawing would show dimensions which had to be constant and those which could vary, and the same could be done for al aspectsof design, from coathooks to landscaping. only such information as they deem appropriate, or act as informers to management through the confidential report system. Direct election: One solution isto dispense with group leaders entirely. But in any group, a leader will emerge naturally: the most articulate or the strongest personality invariably acts as spokesman. It is also an advantage to have a recognised person who can take an overall view of the group’s work: in running a job, we often cannot see the wood for the trees. User feedback :Most of the knowledge for such standardisation of design criteria would come from ‘feedback’. At present, no systematic appraisal existsofschoolsinuse,andthereislittle instrumentalinappointingtheirown gathering of information about design and technical failures and successes. The vital information stored in the minds ofschoolkeepers, teachers, parents, and pupils about the planning and fabricoftheir buildings isuntapped. It is impossible to discover, for example, what type of opening light is most suitable for a specific kind of school in terms of operation, maintenance, safety, ventilation, or cleaning. The answer isthat partof each division’s development group should operate a continual Which?—type investigation into al aspects of existing designs, and feed the information to designers in the formof recommendations. General involvement: The dangerof any centralised development group is that it can become an elite, superior to the job architects it is supposed to serve. It can also attract the kind of people who are not interested in creative design solutions, just as MACE has done. These risks could be avoided by sharing the development work among the job architects, so that it was not confined to a special group. Of course, those involved would need to meet constantly, but contact with design would be ensured ifthe work was additional to their normal activities. leader — either by direct vote or by being Department structure organisation of effective demand The Matthew/ Martin group system has worked well and is generally liked, because each group represents a small unit within a vast organisation with which one can identify. But the groups are arbitrarily set up, and often exist more for the convenience of the group leader than because of their intrinsic worth. There seems to bea floating body of leaders who need groups to be attached to them, rather than the other way round. They are appointed by management, and though their function is not strictly managerial, they are seen to be part of that layer: there is a definite division between ‘governors’ and ‘governed’ at group leader level. Ideally, the function of leaders should be to liaise between management and groups, but this does not happen. The leaders are generally out of touch with their groups’ needs, and they reveal for buildings that society is apparently willing to afford’ Duccio Turin, writing in the Times last year represented on the body which decides such matters. And one thing isessential : a group leader must be involved in design if he is to keep in touch, for it is only by proving himself as a designer that he will earn the respect of his group. Team work: Ifthe group system has the advantage of providing identity, it has the equal disadvantageof isolation. There is an awful tendency in the GLC to compartmentalise, not only between departments but also within divisions. In contrast to private practice, Irarely felt that architects, consultants, quantity surveyors, and planners worked as a team, but rather as 403 RIBAJ August 1973 A group leader must, however, have the confidence and respect of his job architects. There is no reason why the members ofa group should not be ‘Almost independently, but this time at the initiative of manufacturers and contractors, new methods of production of increasingly large chunks of the building fabric have been introduced. Unfortunately, in most cases the economies of scale have proved to be at best insufficient, and at worst nonexistent. The transfer of operations from the site to the factory did not produce the expected saving in labour costs and often failed to offset the additional transport and capital costs. More important still, the large indivisible units of investment required for some of these technologies made them too dependent on a high level of utilisation of productive capacity, which proved incompatible with the degree of continuity and ‘ mes separate baronies guided by set rules and rigid formulas, each safeguarding its own territory and offloading as much work as possible onto job architects. There was not much cooperation or contact in the design stage, and no great willingness to discuss problems or try new solutions. These failures were caused not by the quality or personalities of the other members of the ‘team’, but rather by the system which encouraged separatism and departmentalism. Whatever ‘multi disciplinary teamwork’ means, the GLC has the opposite. The evidence can be seen in the finished buildings, where services are often considered inadequately, or not at all, or seem to be added as an afterthought. In most ILEA schools, the standard of artificial lighting layouts and heating systems (usually radiators) ismediocre. Ifmulti disciplinary grouping isagood thing, then the GLc, which employs everyone involved in building design, is ideally equipped to encourage this way of working. It might well provide new impetus to the group system: certainly, the work of firms like Ove Arup or Ryder & Yates testifies to its benefits. Management’s role: Ifpublic offices must have a management structure, then how can itbe improved, and prevented from becoming even more alienated and autonomous as authorities increase in size? In the first place, departments must be organised on the basisof real participation for al employees as described above. Management can no longer expect to make al the decisions which deeply affect the work and goals of professionals in their departments. If it is true that we are all, in the last analysis, professional architects united in our concern about quality, then how much greater weight would management’s arguments have ifthey were supported by a majorityof their fellow professionals. Second, in the event of building users and local communities winning an equal share in the power to decide the shapeof their own environments (and I think this is inevitable), the role of management will have to change drastically. People who are intimately concerned with their own buildings will not listen to the usual managerial hyperbole and equivocation. Lastly, there is a great need for management that iscreative, far sighted, and sensitive to the implications of changing social requirements. Of course, the organisationof the design and construction of large school building programmes is not easy: there are many problems related to costs, the state of the building industry, maintenance of standards, and changing educational needs. The heavy handed imposition of crude and soul destroying ‘solutions’ like MACE is the clearest example of how these problems should not be tackled. > More but smaller boards was the theme of a major reshaping of RIBA affairs proposed by the new President to this session’s first Council meeting. He asked Council to approve the setting up of ten ‘boards’ (some of them existing committees renamed), including three Like other professional bodies, the RIBA is at the crossroads. Not only do we live in times of rapid social change that demand new activities on our part, but we face the task of gaining the active support of the 70 per cent of our members who do not normally take part in our affairs, but who can suddenly redirect or halt the work of the Institute when they feel so disposed. new ones — Membership, European Affairs, and International Relations — and he nominated their members as well as choosing honour the undertaking that In a democratic body such as the RBA, theirsistherealpower,andgainingtheir suggestthatweshouldhavemorebut active support is the unsolved problem in the government of this Institute. My own View is that the majority of members do not want to be actively involved in the day to day running of our affairs. They expect Council to lead and to produce progressive policies that are generally acceptable to them. Iam convinced that ifwe are seen to be solving urgent problems of real importance to the membership, then we will have strong support from the great majority, including the willingness to pay increased subscriptions if necessary. Isuggest that we need to define what has to be done now, and then change our organisation to do it. In addition to our usual concerns, we could, in a two year programme, achieve the following five objectives. 1 Make clear to the public the background against which architecture has been practised in postwar years, and what is currently expected of it. 2 Establish a code of professional competence. 3 Retain and, where necessary, adjust mandatory fee scales and terms of engagement, and introduce a code of employment of salaried staff related to them. 4 Work to secure satisfactory terms for the entry of the profession into the Common Market. 5 Represent more forcibly the views of the profession in connection with all matters of the natural and built environment. To deal with these new problems RIBAJ August 1973 smaller boards. It seems to me that the whole of our activities, old and new, could be covered by ten boards, explained below. And the number of Council and coopted members for each board should vary with need, but where possible should be limited to seven. Every board should have a majority of elected members, and every group should, where possible, have a Council member on it. There is an exception in the case of the Education Board, where special circumstances exist, and itwould be prudent to retain the old board structure for at least another year. Where necessary, groups would be established from within the boards to undertake specialised work. Here is a brief description of the work of each board and group where it differs from what now exists. Public Affairs Board: No change at the moment, but the board should be asked to produce for the October Council proposals for the establishment of an environment group to represent the views of the profession at national level. Practice Board: Work to be reorganised and to include six groups with special responsibility for the following: building industry relations, legislation affecting the practice of architecture, salaried architects and their professional status and conditions of employment, fee scales and conditions of service with special reference to the Monopolies Commission, standards of competence and the possibilities of introducing a new code, and policy and administrative matters affecting the existing code, There would obviously be times when the work of a particular board would be of interest to a wider section of Council than the board’s own members. Where important matters of policy are to be discussed, agendas of board meetings should be published well in advance so that all members of Council can attend: the formal voting decisions should, however, be confined to elected members. There are also occasions when subjects for discussion are matters for more than one board. Smaller boards and their groups will make joint meetings more convenient, and allow the Membership and Public Affairs Boards to become involved where their specialist knowledge would be helpful. Tn these ways, every member of Council would have the opportunity of discussing important matters at board level, thus saving a good deal of time and often misunderstanding in Council. This system will undoubtedly deny us some interesting performances in Council but, on the other hand, will enable us to make better progress with our work. A larger number of smaller boards and their subsidiary groups, with every a team of vice presidents to lead them (see p 369). He also listed five main objectives — based on the action programme approved by the previous Council — efficiently, we must alter the pattern of our board structure. At the moment, it is organised on traditional lines in which work is undertaken by a small number of relatively large boards or committees, all eating away at conventional agendas. In large committees or boards, it is not unusual for only a few members to become committed and identified with the work in hand. For this reason, I subscriptions will not be raised until 1975 at the earliest. This is an edited version of the President's Paper: the Council debate is reported on p 369 which he thought could be achieved in the next two years, and he reminded Council that it must Council paper A two year programme including the work currently carried out by the investigation committee. Membership Board: Membership relations are very important, and this new board will occupya central position in the affairs of Council and be available for consultation by other boards. European Affairs Board: Britain’s entry into the EEC is of great importance to the membership at large. The matter is SO important that it warrants a new board with a special relationship to ARCUK. International Relations Board: We must not be overawed by Europe, and our links with the Commonwealth and other areas of the world must be maintained. This board will keep Council informed of world affairs in matters of architecture. DEMOCRACY FOR ARGHITECTS Architect Louis Hellman — more widely known as the brilliant weekly cartoonist on the ‘Architects Journal’ — left public practice in March this year after working for five years in the schools division of the GLC architecture department, which he joined because he thought it would provide better design opportunities than private practice. Hellman resigned after a fight with senior management over the quality of school building in London, during which he was told that he must either design an Islington school in the Mace system — which he believed to be crude, uneconomical, technically shoddy, and against his notion of professionalism — or move to another division — a choice which he found unacceptable. The following is an account of Hellman’s experiences as a job architect in the GLC, the struggles within the department to democratise its organisation, his downfall while trying to maintain professional standards, and some thoughts on alternative ways of working. It includes a history of the GLC architecture club and its efforts to establish a more effective voice for those glued to the drawing board. The article presents a view from the bottom layer of the pyramid —one that is rarely heard and still less rarely heeded — and it does nothing to dispel the fear that, as they are reorganised into bigger units, local authorities will become even more internally undemocratic, inflexible, and unwieldy, and externally more out of touch with the community’s needs. Some readers may think that Hellman’s narrative is overpersonal in places, or perhaps even raw and bitter, but the RIBAJ believes that itdeserves to be taken seriously. His arguments on system building and the proper function of administration raise a lot of solid architectural questions about competence and creativity, management’s role, job participation, and responsibility to users. As the RIBA has repeatedly pointed out — most recently in its action programme for the seventies — these are issues which are crucial to the future of architecture in Britain. The RIBAJ believes that the profession must discuss them openly and vigorously if it is to survive. A leading article is on p 365 and our pages are, as always, open to members’ views. Background: why | joined the GLC Ijoined the GLC in the summer of 1968 for two reasons. First, I had been employed until then by alarge well known private practice in a team designing a vast new university in the midlands. Iwas very dissatisfied both with team design urder centralised control and with large projects, and I had come to the conclusion that part of the reason for the failure of modern architecture is the size of many projects: such scale virtually presupposes bleak, characterless, and anonymous results. In the GLC schools division Ithought that Iwould have an opportunity of designing small buildings with a great measure of personal control from start to finish. 395 Second, the GLC architect’s department had retained somethingof the reputation built up in the late 1950s both for the quality ofits output and the freedom allowed to architects to develop their ideas. I had become disillusioned with the orthodox functionalist dogmas that had been instilled in me both in college and in offices, and Iwas looking for ways of practice that would allow me to develop alternatives to what Ibelieved to be irrelevant and anti humanist design principles. The old Lcc’s reputation was the direct result of reforms instituted after the second world war by the progressive and far sighted chief architects, Robert Matthew and Leslie Martin. They reorganised the department on the group principle, with leaders heading small groupsof job architects who had greater freedom of action than under the old system, and they also propagated modern architecture as the style that could best cope with the building programme of a large local authority, while at the same time attracting young and enthusiastic job architects to do the work. Eachof these achievements was made within the overall structure ofa large and rigid bureaucracy. Isoon learned that during the reign of the then chief architect, Hubert Bennett, the department had stagnated under uninspired leadership. The original impetus, whose success flowed from the confidence placed in job architects and the encouragement given to them, had given way to a new brand of bureaucratic control. Moreover, the architectural climate of the late sixties and early seventies was quite different from that ofthe previous decade. no longer enough to be allowed to tinker in isolation with one’s own It was RIBAJ August 1973 RIBAJ August 1973 An open invitation to everyone with aclient who can’t make up his mind about wall panels EZ ia Y \ | om > 1\ \ i} z S\2, * Pictures alone can’t help him. Hand samples can give no idea of the final effect. Bring him along to Anderson’s magnificent showrooms in Islington Green. Let him see for himself the most unique display of full-size panels, which can be ordered on the spot. Plus Ceiling Panels, Doors, Timber, Plywood. Every kind. of board. All under one roof. And if you can’t spare the time yourself, ask him to come and see us on his own. He'll enjoy it. And it will save you a great deal of time and trouble. C.F.ANDERSON &SON LTD. ISLINGTON GREEN, LONDON, NI 2XJ (Established 1863) Telephone: 01-226 1212 Telex: 261321/2 particular stylistic preoccupation. The growing awareness among both laymen and professionals of the wider political and social implicationsoflocal authority building meant that the architect’s role as a paternalistic professional oligarch who alone knew what was best for the tenants and children of London was increasingly in question. The recipients of the Lcc’s versions of ‘ville radieuse’ were not as grateful as they should have been. Not only were they emerging in action groups and talking of participation, but they were starting to ask embarrassing questions, such as why do the architects who so vehemently advocate concrete high rise monumental solutions live themselves in houses with gardens? In planning, too, it was becoming clear that the wholesale destruction of London, to which the GLC wasa party, was being done in the name of increased profit for a minority, and that it would be replaced not by some continental style utopia, but by featureless and grim complexes inwhich minimal provision was made for people’s needs. As the sixties drew to a close, there was no sign that the GLC architect’s department was in any way broadening its thinking or equippingitself to grapple with major changes in society, as it had done in the postwar decade. On the contrary, itwas retreating even further to a blinkered and alienated paternalism. New management takes command Under the Tories, the ‘managerial revolution’ arrived in the architect’s department. For the first half of my time in the GLC under Bennett, the hierarchy was headed by men of the old regime — essentially conservative, drawn from public school backgrounds, and trained as architects before the war. Becauseof their belief in their divine right to positions at the top, they could afford to be tolerant, or even eccentric, ina disinterested and affable way. But at the same time, they were inefficient, relied heavily on the old boy network, and were il at ease with technology and environmental sciences. The management conscious architects who took over from them were a new breed of conservatives, much more similar to Ted Heath and his band. Because of their working class and grammar school backgrounds, they felt that they had attained their position not by privilege but through their own effort and determination, and so they were much more inflexible and hardnosed in the face of what they saw to be any threat to their rank. They had been trained in the forties and early fifties, and were cast in the orthodox functionalist and technological mould. fashionable) and retaineda belief in the centralised stalinist brand of socialism. Local authorities with their bureaucratic structures were ideal for them. The myth of ‘management’ has pervaded society in general. The notion ofa superior caste of decision makers, formulating policy and handing down directives to a lesser body of ‘work units’ who carry out the tasks without question, is increasingly accepted as the only way that Great Britain Ltd can be run. The managers are separated from the rest ofus by big offices, personal secretaries, expense account lunches, access to confidential information, and chauffeur driven cars. They must have all these, we are told, in order to negotiate with other managers, whether in government or industry, here or abroad. It is further believed that the implementation of management techniques can solve every problem: introduce them into any huge organisation, and al will be well. The GLC management structure ismade in this image (suitably watered down, ofcourse). Professionals who aspire to these dizzy heights must shake off the remnantsof building design, with its connotations of manual labour, draughtsmanship, and creativity. As the clerk to Kent County Council said in the Bains report: “When an architect or surveyor reaches midmanagement level, he will have to make a choice between top management and the professional side. Professionalism has its merits and provides a high standard of advice, but itcan also inclinate [sic] against the corporate approach.’ In his own terms,of course, he isentirely correct. Management today isabove professional responsibility: itisnot possible within the GLC to progress through the upper grades and stil function as an architect. As the concept of ‘management’ emerged with its semantic encumbrances — ‘branch head’, ‘work units’, and ‘control data’ —so the gulf widened in the GLc between the upper grades and the architects doing the design work. Similarly, as the power and autonomy of the managerial bureaucracy were strengthened, so the gap increased between the transient politicians and the permanent ‘civil service’ of professional advisers. So the architectural hierarchy was doubly alienated —first from the needs and aspirations of designers, and second from the only representatives of the users for whom the authority’s buildings were supposed to be designed. Administrators were now in positions of power out of all proportion to their merit or talent. Top managers have always been appointed by the GLC to act as virtual dictators: the heads of the various sections are individually responsible for al decisions and departmental policies. That is why you never sign your own GLC, but instead write the name ofyour divisional ordepartmental head. Itisa procedure that Ialways found hard to comply with, because there issomething dehumanised about signing another’s name. In addition, of course, when buildings are shown in the press, their authorship is always attributed to ‘The architect to the council’. Like the grading system, it seemed to me part of a general conspiracy to ensure that your personal identity was destroyed. The old regime had coped with this situation by operating a benevolent and tolerant dictatorship, and never using their power as despots. The new managerial class, however, exploited and abused their power at every opportunity. Indeed, the difference in values between architects and management was, to me, unnerving. I ‘Itis almost unheard of for job architects [in public practice] to report to client committees: they report instead to other architects who know better than they do. The pyramid style is only a mirror of most other departmental establishments in town and county halls, but in most departments the base of the pyramid is composed of clerks. In architect departments, itis composed of highly qualified professionals who are treated like clerks’ George Oldham in the May RIBA Journal had naively thought that, as qualified architects, we would basically share the same goals. At no time, however, did I find management cooperative or helpful. They appeared to be concerned only with maintaining their own position with the minimum of effort and trouble. Ifany real problem was raised, it would be met with some vague and totally useless observation, or some snide reference to one’s own alleged inadequacies. Some at group leader level had reputations for doing no actual work at all: others spent their time indulging in office affairs or petty manoeuvring in internal politics. From the job architect’s point of view, it was difficult to ascertain what contribution they made, if any. At the same time, management kept a check on those under them by means of a system of secret reports compiled by group leaders. The reports were related not to one’s architectural output, but to personal qualities which those making the reports were not qualified to judge. It was very bad for morale. And so was the reverence for private practice that management constantly displayed. They never failed They might have dabbled in a kind of communismintheiryouth(whenitwas nameOnmemorandaorlettersinthe RIBAJ August 1973 396 to point out how much better and quicker architects in private practice could do our work, but they seemed totally unaware that this was mainly the result of their own inept management. Mace: or metric monumentality IfI had left private practice in the hope of entering a more liberal environment, I was soon to learn my mistake. About ayear after Ijoined the GLC, ameeting of the whole schools division was called (a rare occurrence) to inform us that the ILEA was committed to joining MACE (Metropolitan Architectural Consortium for Education) and to initiateusintothewondersofthe system. MACE was sold to us as being different from other systems on two counts:itwaspurposedesignedtocope with urban sites, and it had high architectural quality. Basically, the system was based on a Im planning grid, and appeared to consist of 2.4m high concrete panels supporting an “A deck’ roof structure. the fault of the architects or the system itself. Surely one didn’t have to use those miserable ridged concrete panels, or to produce such stodgy plans? There was, however, a growing wave of discontent from architects using MACE. The technical failings of the system seemed to be more numerous and basic than one would reasonably expect ina new product. A ‘feedback’ conference was held with MACE job architects, and the following are typical ofthe technical inadequacies which emerged indiscussion: First, the 1m planning grid was found to be too large for comfort, and also contrary to the British Standard on modular coordination, which recommends aplanning grid of900mm broken down toa300mm component subdivision. Then there were complaints about poor sound and thermal insulation,aboutthecostofthe system’s ducted warm air heating, about external wall leaks, and about the failures of concrete ground beams, the impractical nature of prepackaged plumbing units, and the lack of choice in finishes. In addition, it appeared that Moreover, I would be the last to advocate purely economic solutions: architects too often lower their standards and abdicate their responsibilities in the face of such arguments. Ifyou sincerely believe a project is worthwhile, you should try to push it through even though it may not be the most economic. The Department of Education & Science, however, is totally committed to system building, and since it controls not only the cost of new schools but also ‘Among the existing local authority departments, some are more professionally oriented than others, and in such departments [the professionals] derive satisfaction both from their own jobsandfromtheknowledgethat [their chief] understands what they are doing and will speak for them’ Bains report on the new local authorities their planning and appearance, each local authority is eager to adopt a system to please its masters in Whitehall. In addition, MACE received an extra development cost allocation from the government, and any scheme designed in MACE will be regarded favourably by the Des — even though it is bottom of the systems league even in the department’s eyes. Apart from pacifying the DEs, of course, a system like MACE dovetails very well with bureaucratic attitudes and controls. MACEis tailor made for management architects because it has a very strong ‘functional’ aesthetic — meaning not that it is functional in practice, but simply that it is rectilinear and modular in appearance. Bureaucrat architects are uneasy when confronted with schemes which show individuality or imagination, and find it hard to read plans and elevations which are not diagrammatically simple. Though discussionof architectural quality remains taboo to them, with a system such as MACE they can talk about ‘modules’ and ‘components’, ‘grids’ and ‘junctions’, and exercise not only control over designers’ careers (as they have always done) but aesthetic control as well. The moral superiority of system building is implicit in orthodox functionalist thinking: the very alternative — ‘traditional building’ — has become a pejorative term. Architecture Itsoonbecameclearthatthedecisionto MACEdidnotcomplywiththeLondon use MACE was afait accompli, for nobody had consulted the job architects on what kind of system —if any —was required. During the subsequent discussion, which was monopolised by group leaders and senior officers, only one architect was courageous enough to voice an objection on the grounds that standards were being lowered. He was immediately made the subject ofa vicious and personal attack by management, who made sneering references to the cost ofa building he had just completed. The implication was that MACE would be highly economic. There was no argument, because the intellectual climateof the division did not allow for free and frank discussion about the purpose of our work. People were not encouraged to speak up for what they believed in: indeed, they were fearful of so doing. When the first MACE buildings were completed in London, they were disappointing to say the least — ugly, out of scale with their urban surroundings, and technically crude. Far from being anonymous enclosures for teaching, they were assertively ‘architectural’ with amost unpleasant brutalist prefab aesthetic. Itwas obvious that those responsible for the development of the components were by no means competent or sensitive designers —a problem of system building which has been better described by Geoffrey Broadbent (see facing page). But though Iwas prejudiced against the system and voiced my doubts openly, Iam not opposed to system building in principle — only to bad system building — will. The whole costing of schools is and Idid not know enough about MACE to judge whether the results were now so fluid and obscure that statistics can be made to prove almost anything. 397 RIBAJ August 1973 building bylaws or fire requirements in some respects. Both the structural engineers and mechanical services engineers were unhappy about many aspects of the system, and resented not having been consulted. It seemed as though MACE had been developed in total isolation, without reference to existing systems, relevant ‘(The GLC department of architecture] has an enviable professional reputation. It demonstrates what a group of people selected for their professional ability and assisted by an enthusiastic and understanding administration can achieve. Itcould, with advantage, be copied by other local authorities’ Jack Whittle, Cheshire county architect: AJ, 2 May authorities, or those who were expected touseit.Aprogrammeforhundredsof schools in south east England had been embarked on without even building and testing a prototype in use. There were ominous rumours that MACE was proving grossly expensive, and that teaching areas and standards were being reduced in order to try and makethesystemwork.Butitisdifficult isdeemedtobealuxurysprayedon,if to criticise MACE on cost grounds, for al required, after the functional theinformationisinthehandsofthe programmehasbeenfulfilled.AsIwas authority and can be manipulated at soon to discover, MACE provides tidy standardised boxes for tidy standardised administrative thinking about tidy standardised school briefs. Battle of Grafton primary school the feasibility of the system. The GLC quantity surveyor on the job had also warned that current estimates showed MACE costs to be rising faster than those in accordance with the brief, to provide open spaces outside the teaching areas, as well as views and daylighting. In my alternative scheme, the five per cent This was the background to my eventual of other buildings. It was agreed that he saving on structure cost could have been confrontation with management, and then my resignation from the GLC. Iwas given aprimary school rebuilding job to design: Grafton school in Islington. I knew that this was part of the MACE programme, and Isaw itasan opportunity to explore the system in detail and find how itcoped with difficult urban sites. Whenaschool isassignedtotheMACE programme ~as are virtually al new primary schools in the GLC area — no prior site investigation is made to assess suitability. The Grafton school site is in the backwaters of Holloway, at the junction of Seven Sisters and Holloway Road: itissurrounded by three or four storey shops, industrial buildings, and decaying houses, and is grossly under the minimum area required by the DEs. In addition, the existing ‘board’ school and its playground were to be retained during the rebuilding, and some corners of the site were not immediately available: therefore the site left for building on was very small, highly irregular in shape, and enclosed on three sides. The education officer stressed the need for a single storey school if humanly possible, and Iagreed. Itseemed wrong to compromise the eventual school and site for the sake of short term restrictions: the school might have to operate under difficulties for ayear or so, but it was the long term solution which would be important. After much work and effort, Iarrived at a single storey solution which was on the MACE grid and met the client’s requirements. MACE representatives assured me that concrete panels could be dispensed with and either purpose designed components or brick cladding substituted. Of course, they had a vested interest in selling the scheme. Privately, however, some members of the MACE design team voiced grave doubts about should check the cost of the scheme, comparing MACE with an alternative Ihad evolved ona previous job which used a ‘rationalised’, loadbearing, brick and steel framed structure, and which had proved highly economic. The conclusion was that MACE would be at least five per cent more expensive than my alternative, provided that the system’s standard kit of concrete loadbearing panels was used. Any introduction of nonstandard units or traditional materials would further increase the cost of MACE. So the 9s suggested that the plan area and the amount of external wall should be reduced. At this point, Idecided that the system was just not appropriate for the site. The elongated and meandering plan form was intended to cope with the irregularities of the site boundary and, ‘Suppose, for example, that we take a technological view on creativity: that it is a matter of solving technical problems in new and more “elegant” ways. Surely that hasa place in anyone’s vocabulary of architectural design techniques, however rational they may think themselves ? Indeed, it has been one of the tragedies of system building, as developed so far, that no One paid much attention to the creative aspects of detail design. In Clasp, for example, the detailing is unbelievably crude: one has only to look at the ways in which windows are fitted into the steel frame, or corners negotiated, to used for additional area or the provision ofcovered outside spaces related to home bays, which thebrief said were essential. But in the MACE system, there Was no way of saving cost to meet the brief’s requirements. How can you reduce area on a Im planning module without chopping off valuable teaching space ? How can you decrease the height of external walls when only a 2.4m high component isavailable? The implicationsof the restriction imposed by the concrete panels Ifound to be serious. The site was depressing and tatty: the sort of mess our society reserves for schools in working class areas. The children in the neighbourhood live in slums or tower blocks which are as shabby and overcrowded as their school environment. They have endured intolerable conditions and waited more agree with Reyner Banham that the “clip joints” are indeed “‘il met’. The problem here, of course, is that the architects who developed Clasp were attracted to the project because they considered themselves non creative...so Clasp became an assemblage of bits and pieces lacking any kind of consistency because no one in the design team was Capable of the creative gestures needed to transcend the immediate problem and produce an overall solution which was elegant in the technical sense’ Geoffrey Broadbent: Designin architecture (see p 419) RIBAJ August 1973 398 Grafton school playground in Islington: two views showing site boundary and surrounding industrial building than fifteen years for anew school. In this situation, the architect’s responsibility isdeep and fundamental. He knows that almost any solution which involves a new building will be initially acceptable to people in such circumstances. Itistherefore essential that great care and attention should be given to providing the best possible solution; it is the easiest thing in the world for middle class professionals to plonk down some bland concrete box in thebelief that the ignorant working class cannot appreciate anything better. Indeed, one of the more serious criticisms ofMACE isthat mostof the architects who are forced to use it have such alow opinionofthe system that they do not give sufficient care and attention to their work. Since the system can be blamed for any failures in design, the general attitude is to get it over and done with as quickly as possible, and hope to move on to something more satisfying. This isa bad stateofaffairs: total standardisation stifles creativity, diminishes autonomy and responsibility, and prevents architects from questioning every design assumption. 30 MARCH 1973 Hellman’s letter to ILEA leader Ashley Bramall *I was recently removed as architect in charge of rebuilding the Grafton primary school, Islington, because of my conyiction that the Mace system* was not appropriate for this site. I would like to briefly describe the justifications for my conclusions, which were not arrived at lightly, but were the result of long and careful deliberation and a great deal of work and effort. ‘The initial site is grossly under area, hemmed in by housing and industrial buildings on three sides, and long and irregular in shape. These constraints resulted in a plan form with a complex perimeter to skirt the meandering boundaries, to provide light, and to open out the spaces related to teaching areas. I found the Mace system too inflexible to cope satisfactorily with these conditions. ‘The alternative method of building proposed by me was estimated by the quantity surveyor to be at least 5 per cent cheaper. The scheme cannot be built in Mace without further reducing teaching areas. ‘L agreed to design the school knowing that itwasintheMace programme andonthe assumption that the quality of the result would depend on the architect. Having investigated Mace thoroughly, both in planning and completed buildings, Ino longer believe this to be the case. The technical and financial restrictions mean that, at best, the result will be mediocre and out of scale, and at worst, ugly and technically shoddy. ‘The children in the area live in tower blocks Ido not believe that architecture can be separated from design in this way: the means by which form and spaces evolve is architecture — by which I mean human scale, variety, and sensitivity in every detail. Ibelieved that the children, teachers, and parents of Grafton school deserved these things, as well as warm natural materials and a considered relationship between the building and its site. But the restrictions imposed by an inflexible, uneconomic, and poorly designed system like MACE are too great for individual architects to control the result more than marginally. Iwas shown a‘good example’ ofa MACE school in Surrey where the architect had quite rightly dispensed with the concrete panels. But he had replaced them with painted plywood! The school was opened only recently, and so the ply has not yet experienced the relentless onslaught of English weather and lusty children. What kind ofspace age technology isthat? Iwon't discuss the unpleasant details of how Iwas speedily removed from the job by management, who had either not seen the plans or site, or had glanced at the scheme for only a or near slums. Ibelieve that they deserve something better than mean concrete boxes for their school environment. That “‘better’” Iconsidertobenatural,warmmaterialsand textures (brick and timber), a variety of lighting and spaces, and a considered relationship of new buildings both to the old environment around them and to the site landscaping. The quantity surveyor confirmed that such a solution was possible within the budget. ‘The implications of my dismissal from the job (without a proper chance to put my case, I might add) are, I believe, serious as far as architects working for the ILEA are concerned. It seems that architects will no longer be allowed to exercise their professional judgement in evaluating what they professionally consider to be the solution in the best interests of the client. ‘I know that I am not alone in believing that ~ few minutes. They were not willing to discuss the reasons for my conclusions. Iwas offered no other job, and was given the choice of doing the scheme in MACE or leaving the schools division. Education officers, quantity surveyors, and engineers had privately voiced their dislike of MACE. Informed opinion in the architectural profession had demonstrated the economic and social failures of closed systems. For these reasons, it was essential that any dissent such as my own should be seen to be crushed quickly and easily, as a warning to others. As Jsaid in my open letter to Ashley Bramall, the leader of the ILEA, on leaving the GLC (see below), the implications of this ‘minor’ incident are serious and far reaching for architects working in the GLC. In effect, they are being asked to actina manner which they know is unprofessional. An architect’s professional responsibility (which transcends his immediate responsibility to his employer) is to evaluate every solution at his disposal, and to select that which he deems to be in the best interests of the client. I was prevented from exercising that judgement. Mace isadisastrous mistake, and that the ILEA has been very badly advised by officers to join the consortium, for at a recentmeetingofschoolsarchitectsinthe GLC, the overwhelming majority yoted to reject Mace in its present form. ‘The GLC has in the past won international acclaim for the high quality of its school design. This was achieved by giving free rein to the designers, and by showing confidence in their professional abilities. I beg you and your committee to reconsider the position regarding Mace before we commit ourselves further to this form of visual pollution.’ *Metropolitan Architectural Consortium for Education: a prefabricated building system for schools in south east England using mass produced, wall height, rough concrete panels, and tlat roofs. Outside wall and room heights are standardised. Ashley Bramall’s reply to Hellman ‘I haye read with interest your letter about Grafton primary school. I have already asked for a comprehensive review of the use by the ILEA of the Mace system of construction, and Iunderstand that the report will be presented to the appropriate subject committee immediately after the election. While the authority is a member of the consortium it is implicit that the system should be used whenever practicable. ‘So far as the issue of Grafton school is concerned, Iam told that our senior professional officers did not agree with your view that the use of Mace was impracticable, nor that in the hands of a competent architect the school need be *‘mediocre and out of scale”’ or ‘‘ugly and technically shoddy’’: furthermore that, even in the form of construction you fayour, the quantity suryeyor’s adyice was that your scheme could not be built within the cost limits. It is these cost limits which have led to the lowering of standards in school building. ‘May Isay that Ifind your claim that you had no proper chance to put your case difficult to understand in view of your long discussion with the schools architect [James Pace] about your attitude to the Mace system. ‘Within the architect’s department, as you say, architects are given considerable scope in exercising their professional judgement.* They must, however, be subject to those responsibilities which fall to professional officers in charge of a department in carrying out the authority’s building programme.’ *The text of his letter shows that Hellman did not say this — editor. RIBAJ August 1973 How architects ought to work System building carries such a built-in moral imperative that any opposition to this holy functionalist doctrine is taken to imply the desire to return to some mediaeval craft based building technology. But sensible opponents would be the last to advocate a return totheoldsystemof/aissezfairein design terms. Though I have stressed individual responsibility for design, this does not mean that architects, whether in public or private practice, should continue to work in a vacuum, alienated from the real life of buildings. Good architecture has never been produced in this way. Ibelieve that there should be more rather than less constraints on architects in the design stages: but the sourceoftheconstraintsisimportant. Those imposed by crude standardisation of the end product, departmental myopia, oligarchic management, or surrogate clients are irrelevant and can be swept away without a second thought. On the other hand, constraints in the form of monitoring and consultation, which stem from liaison with those most closely concerned with buildings (namely, users in the widest sense), are necessary and essential. Within the office organisation, there should equally be a strong design discipline — not necessarily involving standardisation ofthe architect’s end product, but rather the means by which he achieves that solution. Management, instead ofexisting mainly to perpetuate itsownmythology,shouldbeemployed to ensure that the lines of communication between the different parts in the design process function continually to their fullest extent. Such a reorganisation can be summarised under three headings: contact with users, design information, and departmental organisation. Contact with users Oneofthe reasons formediocrity in local authority architecture is that designers are not answerable to those most concerned with buildings: the real clients. The GLc chief architect, Sir Roger Walters, has praised the consultation which the Swinbrook area forced the GLC to undertake before it designed housing there. To the council, however, participation means allowing users to choose between, say, three colours of concrete cladding: that apart, ithardly affects the way the department works. The GLC cannot or will not comprehend that participatory design involves fairly radical changes in the thinking and methods of designers, to enable them to deal with real clients. Briefing:Atthemoment, briefingis conducted by administrators, with architects playing a subservient and passive role. The “brief” is often in the form ofa sacred schedule of rooms or fixed areas, and may not be deviated from. Only administrators have the power to alter areas, while architects are expected to make no contribution at all. In school design in particular, vital decisions are often made by people who have no architectural or educationalqualificationswhichare greatly detrimental to the functioning of schools and their relation to the community. The users ofthe buildings play no part in this process: the school head may perhaps attend the meeting where the final sketch plans are presented, but he or she will rarely be in a position to contribute much, or even to comment usefully. Briefing should surely be a much more fluid process, entailing face to face RIBAJ August 1973 Three Mace schools Left Assembly hall, Edith Neville primary school, Camden. See also p 371 Below Concrete wall panels, Godstone infants school, Surrey Below left Detail of concrete panel, St Nicholas esn school Purley, Surrey discussion between architects and user representatives, and administration should be confined to its proper function, which is to provide liaison and advice. This process would ideally develop from free interchange of ideas to the formulationof a loose brief and eventually abuilding solution. Itis to be hoped that committee members, who are the community’s political representatives, would also be involved in the meetings, instead of merely rubber stamping the final plans — as they do now. The ILEA education architect, Gordon Wigglesworth, has recently hinted that some parental involvement in the design of schools is imminent. ‘It is al part of the new grass roots democracy and is to be welcomed. Politicians today have become far too remote from the local issues which mean so much to their electors’ (note the careful shifting of blame on to politicians). But, if ‘parent participation’ isinterpreted by the GLC in the same way that ‘architect participation’ has been, itis unlikely to be of much value — except in improving the corporate image. Indeed, the old attitudes already show through the pious liberal affirmations, as when Wigglesworth emphasises the understanding of people’s ‘needs rather than wants’ — the standard professional euphemism for ‘we know what's best for you’. Empirical information: Architects spend far too much time in their offices toying with designs on paper. There is no substitute for direct experience of the day to day working of schools — for observing teachers and children in practice. Not enough encouragement is given to architects to visit schools, and when they do itisoften when the building is empty, so that the children will not ‘spoil’ the spaces. Even walking round when the kids are there is not really enough: it is difficult to understand what is happening in teaching situations (it might even stop when visitors come), and architects often concentrate only on the building fabric anyway. School designers should be able to ‘sit in’ and observe for long periods before tackling designs on paper. More can be learned from a week’s intelligent and > perceptive observation than ina year spent scrutinising design guides or DES bulletins, though these certainly provide useful back-up material. And experience of other activities related to the school —staff seminars, PTA meetings, playground games, even the local pub — Isequally essential. Local involvement: There is a need for greater liaison with boroughs and community organisations to determine local requirements. Though in theory the boroughs now have far more control over their own affairs, there is stil the feeling that the GLC is uncooperative, antagonistic, and bullying toward local councils. There should, however, be no conflict of ‘interests’ between authorities which each serve the same people in the area. The process of choosing sites very much affects these relations, and at the moment it is not carried out efficiently. Potential sites are scrutinised on ordnance survey maps in the office, and if(as invariably happens) they are found to be too small, adjoining houses are arbitrarily added to make up the minimum area required by the DES Participation and the architecture club... Early in 1972, the new chief architect to the GLC, Roger Walters, suggested that an architecture club might be organised on similar lines to the many groups and societies which already existed in the council. He further expressed the wish that such a club should be run by younger architects in the department and remain free from interference by the upper levels But the ad hoc committee formed to get the club going was composed of the usual establishment yes men, who proposed a programme of events which consisted mainly of inviting private big name architects to chat about their work A group in the schools division, resentful of yet another activity being taken over by the mentally middle aged, got together to determine what job architects might expect such an organisation to do. Two main aims — participation and user contact — emerged from their initial discussions and were circulated in a pamphlet. The following is an extract ‘We job architects believe that there is a need for a forum to discuss our role within the GLC, with the aim of finding how to improve the architecture produced by the department, and how to make our voice felt effectively ‘We feel that the architecture club, which has been officially sanctioned as our organisation, is an ideal framework within which to discuss these matters, and we should like to see the following points debated as a matter of priority: ‘The architects on the lower level have no say in the running of the department, and no possibility of participating in the internal decisions which fundamentally affect their working lives. We job architects are expected to carry out policies made without prior consultation and which frequently conflict with our professional ethic ‘The architecture club should represent the working architects of the GLC — who are the majority. Since we do the real work, we should participate in the decisions which affect our work as professionals, and also our working environment. There must be no question of veto or approval by the establishment “We have no contact-of any kind with the real clients of our buildings, whether they be tenants, teachers, children, or old people. We are forced to make do with the interpretations of user requirements made by middle men and administrators, such as housing managers or education officers: the false clients. We do not believe that these people, however good their intentions, can truly represent the real clients increased pressures from job architects in the schools division, who wanted to meet management to discuss this problem. A meeting was duly organised and management expressed support for the idea of ‘participation’. But it was clear that they interpreted the ‘The club should start to fil the gaps by pressing for the implementation of Skeffington, and by restructuring the architect/client organisation to allow direct contact and participation. Non architects should not merely be allowed to join, as has been suggested, but should be actively encouraged to word to mean some mild and participate. And the club should have its own magazine” At the subsequent election of a permanent committee to run the club, a majority of architects in sympathy with these aims were voted in. The result of a questionnaire circulated to everyone in the department showed that most people wanted just such a forum to discuss matters which were of immediate concern In one respect, of course, the GLC is a paper tiger. Everyone who joins soon develops the notion that Big Brother is watching every move and waiting to pounce at the slightest hint of dissent. But it is all in the mind, since ‘the GLC’ is only the people who work in it. On the other hand, those who organised the club’s activities — which included meetings on the Covent Garden scheme with the planning team and community spokesmen, architect and tenant seminars on housing chaired by Nicholas Taylor and David Eversley, and discussions on schoo! design with teachers — knew that they were seriously jeopardising their careers within the department The first demand in the club’s ‘manifesto’ — participation within the department — led to harmless form of consultation: they were prepared to give information about selected policy decisions, but not about those which, for whatever reason, were deemed ‘confidential’ The meeting was in no mood for this, however, and much to the annoyance of management, votes were taken on several important issues, including the use of Mace. The majority who votedtorejectMacein its present form were by no means composed solely of the ‘radicals’ or the ‘articulate’, but on the contrary were those who would normally have been thought too timid or apathetic to make their feelings known The value of voting at such a general meeting was brought home to me by the majority's rejection of Mace. |understood why bodies like trade unions, which use such apparently cumbersome procedures, are ridiculed and attacked by the press:management cannot abide decisions which are not the result of secret negotiations by appointed individuals To the further irritation of management, this important meeting was reported in the professional press. For a whole day, the first floor of County RIBAJ August 1973 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Maurice McCarthy Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 01 May 1974 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/5d5608350b085d890021ca24008fa0de.pdf c56ac8adbf43e83a25ba01cc2dbafb69 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' fee scale slammed in report Subject The topic of the resource Article in Daily Express Description An account of the resource By Jeremy Gates THERE was a slap in the face yesterday for Britain's 27.000 architects who are already facing one of the worst recessions in history. For a massive 200 - page report from the Government's Monopolies and Mergers Commission claimed that their scale fee system of charges was against the public interest. The report is publi.shed at a time when 1,000 architects are already on the dole—with forecasts that 7,000 more may join them in the next 12 months it the industry remains in the doldrums. The Commission found that charges on 99 per cent of the architect's workload were fixed by scale fee. The report called for the architects-to scrat) the scale tee system — and to quote competitive rates for every job. A spokesman for the Royal Institute of British Architects said last night : " 'l'be scale fee plays an important role in maintaining proper standards of service in both public and private practice." Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J Gates Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/d96e0bc0a898f0fc3d67b94f33e85d54.pdf e63bf3bb8257368160f2660a54603426 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' fixed fees attacked Subject The topic of the resource Cutting from The Guardian Description An account of the resource By Judy Hillman, The fixed fee system applied body. However, Mr Roy Hatters- ley, Secretary of State for | Prices and Consumer Protec- tion, has already asked the Dir- | ector General of Fair Trading by architects should be ended because it works against the public interest, the Monopolies Commission reported yesterday. to discuss the necessary action It also criticised architects for preventing competition for jobs. The report suggests that an independent committee should fix fee leyels which would not, |however, be binding and would leave architects free to fix their own price The Royal Institute of British with the professions—the sur- |; veyors have been covered in a second report—to change their present practice. The RIBA said the commmis- sion, by over-emphasising price competition, had made recom- mendations which could lead to a drastic reduction in quantity |4 Architects immediately de- and quality of xervices. unced the conclusions and it intended to fight the for an independent review The report does not agree. “We would expect the client always to be concerned with obtaining value for money in exi his choice of architect but not| tral | always to choose the cheapest, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J. Hillman Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/eea59478269bd7d6f74519460afc1bae.pdf 9b5e162409b49f2066e0ad4722296688 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Trade Unions and Architecture Description An account of the resource Themes included action on asbestos and Health &amp; Safety, and involvement with Direct Labour Organisations and Building Unions. Following comparative research of possible options, NAM encouraged unionisation of building design staffs within the private sector, negotiating the establishment of a dedicated section within TASS. Though recruitment was modest the campaign identified many of the issues around terms of employment and industrial relations that underpin the processes of architectural production. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' Journal Subject The topic of the resource TASS chosen as architects' union by NAM Description An account of the resource TASS chosen as architects’ union by NAM conference Why TASS? The main advantages of TASS were stated as being its | efficiency in recruiting and in providing technical back-up when needed: It is reputed to have the best research depart- ment of any union of its size. TASS, formerly DATA (Draughtsmen and Allied Techni- cians Association), has over 140 000 members which makes it the second largest white collar union in the private sector. Although part of the 1400 000 strong AUEW, TASS remains largely independent with its own finances, staff, headquarters and a large degree of autonomy over its own industrial and political policy. Architectural workers will be able to have their own branches within the union which will allow them a large amount of autonomy to develop in their own way. At All people employed in private sector offices in the building professions where no union is already recognised are urged to the same time they will retain the advantages of being in a join TASS: the Technical, Administrative and Supervisory large powerful union which will be capable of providing Section of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers (AUEW). This is the recommendation of a special one-day conference on trade unionism in architecture and the allied building professions, sponsored by the New Architecture TASS considers it is already connected with the building in- Movement in London last Saturday. An organising committee has been instructed by the conference to make a recruiting drive. The decision comes after six months of debate and research into which union would be most suitable for architects and other allied workers. A committee set up by the New Archi- tectureMovement’sCongressinBlackpoollastNovemberhas sectionofUCATT tobetheobviouschoice;beingtheunion had negotiations with officials from ASTMS (Association of most firmly connected with the building industry. But speakers Scientific, Technical and Managerial Staffs), STAMP (Sup- pointed out that STAMP has extremely poor back-up facilities, ervisory, Technical, Administrative, Managerial and Profes- would be unable to provide much support for recruitment, sional section of UCATT), TGWU (Transport and General and that architectural workers could not have their own auto- nomous branches. Conference chooses TASS for private sector GO-AHEAD FOR DESIGN UNION muscle in the eventuality of industrial disputes. TASS also organises actively on the part of women who com- prise over 11 per cent of the membership. dustry through its link with the AUEW’s Construction Engin- eering Section and because of the several hundreds of em- ployees in building professions who are already TASS mem- bers; mostly architectural and engineering staff in industry. The decision of the conference to select TASS will come as a surprise to many people who would have expected the STAMP AMID growing calls for unionisation from private sector employees, TASS, the 160 000- member Technical, Administrative and Super- union should recruit among all among architectural staffs, and visory Section of the AUEW,, is to set up a “union the building professions. the widening gap between Most of the 70 participants private sector salaries and within the union”’ for building design staffs. at the conference were archi- conditions and those in the This action follows last Saturday's decision of a special tectural employees, but eng- public sector. Despite the NAM-sponsored conference of architectural employees ineering, quantity surveying — profession's declining work load, several architects present called to launch a trade union organising drive. and town planning were also complained of understaffing, A ten-person committee set engineering design and _ its represented. Salaried architects excessive overtime and the resultant decline in the quality of service provided for clients and users. up by the conference met on progress in organising pro- Monday evening with Harry fessional engineering consult- Smith, TASS National Organ- ancies. Meeting behind closed iser, to begin planning the doors in London, the confer- campaign. A London branch of ence chose TASS from options TASS for building design staffs which included ASTMS, EMA, will be launched at an open STAMP, TGWU, and forming meeting on May 31 at the New a new union. were in a clear majority, although several technicians and secretaries also partic- ipated. Less than half of those who attended were NAM members, and one of the organisers described the turn- out as the “tip of the iceberg.” Nearly all participants came in individual capacities, but the members employed in the ference rejected a NAM 145-member Staff Association Ambassadors Hotel. An Advis- ory Committee of rank-and-file In choosing TASS, the con- building professions will be set committee’s recommendation of Robert Matthew, Johnson- up to co-ordinate the organis- to set up an autonomous Marshall and Partners Edin- ing drive nationally. section within the TGWU but burgh office sent a delegate The conference considered endorsed the committee's view who reported that since its proposals to join building that organising should include inception last year, the unions but chose TASS largely al employees — professional, RMJMSA has been looking at on its record of organising technical and clerical — within the question of unionisation among white-collar staffs in the same union and that the with increasing interest. BD Reporter Discussion of priorities for union action centred on redun- dancies, declining real income Workers Union) and TASS. Detailed briefings were prepared by the committee on the advantages of each, and last Satur- day’s meeting was called specifically to decide on one union. Seventy people attended of whom 25 were NAM members. The majority were salaried architects in private practice. Despite a recommendation from the committee in favour of TGWU, a secret ballot clearly showed TASS to be the choice of the conference. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ? Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/741f72381abf86048b136e0918a06ea6.pdf c9ba4a9cf1e2b8670d2bb3fbfc2bb559 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' prices work against public interest Subject The topic of the resource Article in Daily Telegraph Description An account of the resource By JOHN PETTY, Commercial Correspondent A RCHITECTS and surveyors are working a price ring against the public interest, the Monopolies and Mergers Commission said yesterday after a four-year investigatio The Government immediately ordered Mr Gordon Borrie, Director General of Fair Trading, to take action. But the Royal Institute of rchitects said i not accept mgs and would instruct meÄbers to go on charging fixed minimum fees. "We will fight every 9tep of the way." said' Mr Gordon Graham, R I B A president. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors said it was surprised and disappointed by the findings. Abolition of a fixed scale of fees would work against the public intcrest. Free competition Commission produced separate reports on the two rofessions. Each ran to more t an 200 r free tion in pricing. But the Commission suggested- the Government should appoint a small independent committee to draw up a list of recommended prices as guidance to the public- Mr Hattersley, Prices an mer Protection Y, said he e findings of the Commission. His Minister of State, Mr Fraser, said Mr Borrie would meet leaders of the professions with a view to getting them to change their rules. n Mr Borrie will be given six Il months to report back to Mr r. Hattersley. 8' with regard to present circumstances in the construction industry." One of the main RIBA d objections is that the Commission stopped taking evidence nbout 18 months ago and there has been a marked collapse in the building business since then. It claims mandatory minimum fees are vital to carry the profession through slump periods. d Mr Graham said: Architects compete on quality and service, not on price. The report is pathetic." d Architects were depressed at the report's lack di clarity. reason and logic. It appeared to be further debasement of the quality of public debate in favour of dogmas. He said the Commission had Is failed td answer the main case d put forward by R I B A for maintaining the fee scale. R IBA had every confidence that it would be able to persuade Govt ernment that the Commission was wrong. Architects and surveyors both !d said that the bulk of evidence 10 presented to the Commission by v clients was in favour of retain• d ing a fixed-fee scale. On new works. architects It work on a sliding fee scale, with a minimum of 10 per cent. on contracts up to 22,500 in value and a minimum of 5 1 2 per cent. ts on contracts worth El ,750.000 or more. Minimum fees vary from 10 per cent. to 13 per cent. for work on existing buildings. th • • Survev•Or'•r,-ht• teo• Service'" each E2•85. BRIBERY 'VITAL IN EAST' 'LISSION to secure overseas sales were " absolutely necessary " in some Middle Eastern countries, the Old Bailey corruption trial was told yesterday. Sir LESTER SUFFIELD. former head of the Defence Ministry's defence sales organisation and at one time With British Leyland. said, however, that there would never be any question of a British firm paying commission to the British Government to further sales. Lt-C01 DAVID RANDEL, 40. of the Royal Signals, Aldershot, GEOFFREY WELLBURN. also 40, of Woodside Road, Beaconsfield Bucks. and FRANK NURDON. 60, of Barnet Road, Arkley, Herts, all ny corruption charges. ellburn was managin di ector of Racal B CC, o W mbley, which specialises in el onic and communication e ipment. Nurdon was the es director. The prosecution alleges that Randel took about 25,000 in bribes to ensure BCC radio equipment was bought and installed in Chieftain tanks sold to Persia. Secret contents Sir LESTER SUFFIELD said he was unaware of any payments made to officials of foreign countries by the Crown agents, lillbank T chn:cal Services. ogtent' o wh ged, he sa #reement on e to pay comrmssion so th was •not unknown in the M dle East for commission to be paid to officials of foreign co ntries, but the recipients re not necessarily in the in ustrial field. e believed agents were mmees paid their " commission " i cash in the United Kingdom. Ithough he had never been •rectly involved himself in oing it he knew the practice ent on. It was 'i more than likely " at a commission payment uld appear in company Ix)0ks, It not the name of the recipit because it was normal comercial practice to protect ents if thev requested it. In the Chieftain radio contract t e interests of his department d Racal were the. same and e also the country's interest. ndel had a duty as part of t team to further that object. ! would have been practically ssible for Randel while in P sia to have blocked the sale. e trial was adjourned until ersian knight Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J Petty Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/25487a4426d430350e17586dd8ec8e6d.pdf 104d2bf07e3cbf222b521ecf511cf696 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architectural Education: NAM's First Steps Subject The topic of the resource 43 page report on the Group’s preliminary analysis of the issues shaping architectural education Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAM Education Group Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource October 1978 Description An account of the resource CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION Part one : forces currently operatinq to shape architectural education 1 ARCUK and the regulation of architectural education. 2 The influence of the RIBA on architectural education. Some problems raised by the revived interest in the part—time mode of 8 educating archi tects. Part two : forces operatinq on architectural education in the future 17 Archi tectural education and 'Building Britain's Future . Some impressions of 'Model E' : an exploratory paper into some of the relationships between architectural education and the working class 22 student. Part three . archi tectural practice and archi tectural education 29 The RIBA Community Architecture Working Group and architectural education. 36 Lessons from practice' dra t..m from working for ASSIST. 39 CONCLUSIONS 41 NAM Education Group contact addresses. 1 INTRODUCTION On 1/2 July this year, NAM Education Group met for the first time. Of the 30 people who attended, the participants were predominantly academic staff and students, but there were also representatives of private practice, both straight and alternative. The weekend was organised around three sets of workshops. The first of these centred on the forces which currently shape architectural education, with papers on the role of the RIBA and ARCUK. The second, on some of the forces which might operate on architectural education in the future, dealt with both the Government's policy document "Higher Education in the 1980' s" and the Labour Party's policy document "Building Britain's Future". The third workshop examined the relationship between architectural education and architectural practice, with papers on the implications for architectural education of the RIBA's version of "community architecture", and lessons drawn from ASSIST's approach to practice. The weekend enabled us to get together to pool ideas, and to identify particular problem areas which individuals were willing and able to examine. We felt this further examination was necessary to compensate for the current lack of substantive discussion on architectural education in the profession generally, and also in NAM to date. It is difficult to assess the success of weekends such as these. Yet despite the vacuum in which discussion took place, and the necessarily tentative nature of the papers, a consensus did emerge: the impossibility at this stage of atternpting to specify a NAM education policy. We were able to isolate several of the reasons for coming to this conclusion. These are outlined in the Conclusions' section of this document. We like to use these reasons as starting points for the discussion of architectural education at the Fourth NÆ•I Congress. NAM Educa tion Group October 1978 2 ARCUK and the requlation of architectural education Ian Cooper June 1978 Introduction For those of us seeking change, a prirna.ry task will be to develop our understanding of the forces which have operated and/or continue to operate to shape architectural education. Such an will be necessary If we wish to develop a coherent policy. Unpalatable though this be, we will need a thorough worklrg knowledge of those individuals, groups, Institutions and bodies capable of influencing the course of events. bbst inunedlately obvious arrong these stand the RIBA and AEUK. But, even if we just intend to consider these two, the task which confronts us is complex. Especially If a serious attempt is to be made to elucidate the separate — or, at least, separable — regulatory effects, if any, which these two bodies trey be able to bring to bear. However, since NAM has expressed a comitrrent to reform AEUK, it is essential that we should seek to understand both what this Council is presently empowered Eo do and whether, or how, it presently discharged its duties. This paper is offered as a necessarily faltering start, Illustrating possible avenues of approach, to what I hope will become our increasing awareness of the problems and possibilities of the situation In which we find ourselves. ARCUK's duties It is evident that the Architects (Registration) Act, 1931, empowered AEUK — or, rrore precisely, that consanguineous but statutorily independent body, the Board of Architectural Education• — to regulate certain, but quite limited aspecte of archi— tectural education. Foremost, these were enacted as the recognition of examinations qualifying for registration and/or to hou examinations for this same purpose. However, there are two inportant issues on which the Act is less clear but Glich, nevertheless, invinge on those interested in &rglng architectural education in this country. • Hereafter referred to as the BAE. • •Such numbers refer to notes located at the end of the paper. The first, and less tangible, of these issues concerns how legislators intended these duties to be interpreted and so how they meant the BAE to perform Its statutory responsibilltes. While such questions may be dismissed as t history% they be embraced as tapping the roots of our present distress. The latter choice, If accepted, Identifies an area in which we could usefully concentrate a part of our energies. The second Issue is nore obviously pressing but is, unfortuanately, less complicated. It centres on whether, or in what manner, the BAE meaningfully can be said to have discharged, and to be discharging, these two duties. In the case of its responsibility to hold examinations, it is possible to give a clear and categorical answer. The BAE does H)ld exartünations but these are restricted to 'Orals' held to assess 'special cases' presenting themselves for registration. Apart from this exception, since its inception In 1932 the BAE has instead opted not to hold examinations but to recognise those held by others. In tine, these others hmve corne to comprise only recognised schools of architecture and the RIBA. Difficulties arise, however, as soon as an atternpt Is rrade to be more precise than this. Once an effort is made to assess whet-her the various procedures employed since this date for the examinations of these others may be said to have discharged the letter, let alone the sparit, of the Act, then it seems that clarity necessarily dissipates to be replaced by equivocation. For it is difficult, and on occasion impossible, to discern where the actions of the BAE cease and those of the RIBA begin, so inter—related and Indistinguishable have the two bodies become. ( 2) Nor, it has been asserted, Is this synonymity a recent occurrence, V•men the 1931 Act carre into force the first thing the Royal Institute of British Architects did was seize control of the council. They next seized control of the Board of Architectural Education. They predominated on the council and it became known as the (3) The composition of the BAE FETbersh1p of the BAE Is composed, as Is explained below, of fot.x categories; statutory nominations, other nominations, elected representatives, and 'freely elected' rtETbers. Of the four categories, only the elected representatives can, in any sense ' 4 be said to be demcratically accountable for their actions to those whom they are to represent. The representatives of the •unattached Architects' belong to this category. r•Errbers of the other three categories are all appointed by some form of unaccountable patronage. However, while my research (4) does Indicate that rterrbers of the RIBA continue to predominate on the BAE, my findings rtzy also be interpreted to suggest that we would be mistaken to regard these mernbers as a horrogeneous interest In .*eed, it would seem ltE)re pertinent for us to attempt to Identify the coalitions and caucuses within thes rnernbers which effectively operate to control the BAE and its actions. experience suggests that a primary task here is to understand composition of the BAE's General Purposes Corru•nittee. For this appears to rnanipulate parent body by tactics such as withholding contentious informtion or by atterrtptirg to prescribe the legitirnate subjects, and their boundaries, of the BAE's debates. and energy night well be invested in exarnining the backgrounds and affiliations of the members of this Influential sub—committee and of the ærrbers of the BAE itself. further issues may prove rtore difficult for us to æcarnine. First, quite how do individuals become ærnbers of the BAE and, second, once installed, quite whose Interests do they act to serve. As I have already stated, the 1931 Act created four categories of BAE rrembership. The predominant category of merrbers is corprlsed of about fourty statutory nominees. These are individuals who are presunably expected to represent the interests of those particular bodies and institutions specified In the Second Schedule to the Act. It is likely to prove impossible for us to ascertain, eccept on rare occasions, the extent to which such statutory nominees — who are also members of the RIBA (5) actually act to represent the interests of those who send them to the BAE rather than responding to what has been referred to in the Architects' Journal (6) as the RIBA's "three line whip". A third category of trembers consists of those eight individuals present due to a different system of patronage, described — perhaps euphemistically — as nominations under the terms of the 'Gentleræn's •Agreernent' • According to this agreement, non—elected, non—statutory nominees are appointed to the BAE, myself included, by particular interest groups in a manner that is unaccountable 6 because it is private. The final, and perhaps for us the mst mysterious, category selection of the BAE's own representative will be restricted to those BAE ma•nbers of meüers consists of those sixteen individuals appointed as a result of the so—called t free elections'. In fact, tmse who get elected are alway members of the RIBA, due, on at least one occasion, to the Institute's use of the "three line whip" mentioned above. If we seriously wish ARCUK to be reforrned so that it rrey be representative and lay—controlled (7), it is imperative that we understand the means by which particular interest groups have rrenaged to subvert the representativlty legislated for in the 1931 Act. For as Noel Dawson, ARCUK t s previous Registrar, concluded, "The fact that rnany governing bodies do in fact nominate architects to serve on the BAE rxust be taken surely as a compliment to the profession — or as a wish to wash their hands of itL tt (8) The, BAE's performance of its duties It is not possible here for me to offer an extensive description of how the BAE discharges its responsibilities. Instead, I will restrict myself to to derronstrate, by means of a single example, how oblique and circumscribed the BAE's actions have becorne as a result of its involvernent with, if not its subservience to, the RIBA' s own regulation of architectural education. Perhapø nowhere is AEUK t s lack of independence more apparent than in the procedures which the BAE currenüy employs to recognise the examinationos of others. Before 1963, eligibility for initial recognition was assessed by means of documentation which schools sent to the BAE itself. After this date, however, " ARCUK joined the RIBA Visiting Board and sent representatives to the schools (9) Since 1974, the BAE has also "joined" the RIBA to assess schools' eligibility for recognition quinquennially. This assessænt is performed by visiting boards. On these, according to one of the BAE i s own documents, " ARCUK has only one nominated representative although in fact frequently two or even three of the men-bers of the Visiting Board are mernbers of the BAE or Council ( 10) However, what this, or any subsequent, BAE document fails to rnake clear Is that, not only will all of the members of the visiting boards be mernbers of the RIBA; but the who are also members of the RIBA- This restriction occurs, de facto, si -ce BAE visiting board are, in practice, selected from among the names of those BAE and ARCUK menbers who also happen to be on the RIBA's ov•m list of visiting board menbers. There is not, nor does there appear to have been, at least In the recent past, a BAE or ARCUK visiting board menber who was not a manber of the RIBA (11). In effect, what this practice means is that no mznber of ARCUK or of its Board of Architectural Education, which has statutory responsibility for architectural education, may "joint' an RIBA visiting board unless he/she is a me•nber of the RIBA. In other words, no member of the BAE may take part in the current vetting process by which ARCUK seeks to fulfil one of its statutory obligations without being a mernber of a particular constituent body of ARCUK's Council. (12) This exclusion of all but RIBA manbers of the BAE Is just one exarnple of how the present operation of the BAE runs counter to the principle of proportional representation which underlay the framing of the 1931 Act. If we hope to act effectively through ARCUK to counteract practices such as this, then we must admit that there can be no substitute for a thzrough, detailed understanding of abuses of the Act as it is presently operated. Notes 1. See Section 5 of the Architects (Registration) Act, 1931. 2. As John Fraser has shown, fears had been expressed In Parliament prior to the passing of the 1931 Act that the RIBA would usurp the power entrusted to AR<JK and would then dominate architectural education, see p. 2 of Fraser's 1977 paper for the Schools of Architecture Council entitled, Report of the workinq party on the leqal relationship betweal the RIBA and ARCUK. 3. This quotation was cited by Fraser In his 1977 paper, see p.3. Unfortunately, he did not reveal its source. 4. For exarnple, in 1976, forty— seva•i of the BAE's sixty—four menbers belonged to the RIBA, while in 1977 RIBA manbers accounted for forty—nine of the sixty—five of the places taken up on the BAE. Thus, during these •tv,'0 years, RIBA manbers held approximately three-quarters of the seats occupied on the 5. In 1976, twenty—five of the forty statutory nominees were also members of the RIBA, while In 1977, 27 of the forty—one manbers were. Thus, during these two years, RIBA held approximately two—thirds of the places allocated to statutory nominees. 6. See the Architects' Journal of March 23 1977. 7. See pp. 6 & 10—11 of NAM's 1976 document, Private practice: proqress report 8. This statenent was made by the previous Registrar on p. 1 of a May 1977 BAE docurncnt entitled 118/77, Board of Architectural Education. 9. BAE This document statenent entitled was made 89/77, by the ARCtJX previous Recoqnition Registrar Procedures, on p. 3 of BAE/9/77.April 1977 10. Ibid, p.4. 11. For GPC/3/77October exarnple, 1977 . BAE see documa•it the list of visiting 181/77, board ARCUK(RIBA specified Visit-tr-q on Boards,p.4 of 12. The 1931 ACC made provision that the membership of ARCtJK t s Council should be besides dram from the •unattached RIBA, see the architects' First Schedule , and from to the four Act.other 'constitualt bodies' , 8 THE INFLUENCE OF THE RIBA ON ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION (Author's name with—held on request) Preface The purpose of this paper as I see it, is to give an outline of the present situation, to convey the ambience of it, rather than to set dowri in black— and—white "facts" which in reality can only be seen in shaded grey. For this reason I am resisting the ternptation of disproving the RIBA through use of its ovm data — to be specific, its owrr statistics — not only because of a personal belief that statistics are one of the greatest fictions of our time but also because of another conviction, namely that their use can all too easily anaesthetize the critical faculties by implying that state— ments employing then are necessarily objective, and even beyond challenge. My aim then is to help to give a feel inq of what is really going on, and therefore my paper. although factually true, will be less than wholly obj ective. INTRODUCTION Students tend to have one or two attitudes concerning the RIBA —either they ignore it or they detest it. In either case their views are not usually made evident and so do not disturb the RIBA, which in turn sees no need to improve its relationship with the student body or to justify its handling of educational matters — so that the present method of operation continues unchecked. Those who ignore it presumably do so either because they see it so utterly benign or, more likely, as largely irrelevant. Those who detest the RIBA go to the other extrane and, giving it credit for greater evil that it could ever succeed in stage—rpanaging, build up an image of it as a dragon, worthy of taking the blame for all ills inherent in current architectural education — hence the battle cry of "If only we could get it out of our hair and pass everything over to ARCUK". Both these views equally erroneous to me, and both seen to be based on the same fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the RIBA. 9 WHAT IS THE RIBA? At the RIBA's Regional Congress this year their president, Gordon Graham, criticised the speakers en masse: their fault lay in asking "the RIBA to do this, the RIBA to do that" when in fact the RIBA was "you and me and not Port— land Place". (1) The remark was significant in that it emphasised the ambiguity of the RIBA's identity — that of a geographically widespread mernbership of practising architects or of a centralised administration run by civil servant— type bureaucrats. It seans to me that the RIBA is, paradoxically, both of these things at once; furthermore it wuld seen that the old jibe, made by opponents and disillusioned (usually provincial) members, that "the RIBA is a gentlernans club in London" might, if only taken seriously enough for once, contain a clue to how this paradox is wrked out in practice. Consider a gentlenans' club. It is an institution whose members reside in various parts of the country and whose only direct contact with the club occurs when they visit the capital, usually on business. The gentlenen pay an annual fee in return for which they expect the administrative Staff to whom they del egate the responsibility of running the club to do so efficiently, and without reference to the membership concerning the mechanics of how this might be done; the staff chosen are therefore capable and hardworking, but unlikely to openlyquestion matters of policy. The essence of the instit— ution, perhaps unconsciously, is that of a bulwark against change, a bastion of the status quo; the ambience of its headquarters is akin to that of a ref— erence library or a store for archival material — it is comfortable insofar as it contains a reassuring promise that the occupants will remain undisturbed. A selection process of some kind restricts the membership, as far as possible, to those who will maintain the club in its present standing, whose behaviour (1) See Building Design, 9/6/78 10 will be as is proper to it — diplomatic and polite. The analogy is, of course, limited in its application to a professional body. For unlike the traditional club the RIBA has regions and branches with (varying degrees of) life of their own; but the belief of perhaps even a majority of the "country mernbers "is similar, namely that the running of the club is not their responsibility and that atternpts to contact thern and consult even on matters of policy are all rather unnecessary — why else vould one elect a council? In other words they view the RIBA as a service organisa±ion , one with a higher annual subscription than the A.A. or R.A.C. and thus justifiably commanding greater social cache than does mernbership of either of the motoring associations. The last thing they expect to do is to help to n..m it and the first thing they expect from it is a reliable service. Consider a gentlemana' club again. The members, unlike those of a political association, join in order to obtain a service rather than to assert a common ideal. The club is an arena which they enter, usually for social functions, although certain forms of business may also be conducted from there. MgnberS may expect to meet, but not necessarily agree with, fellow members. They have few common obj ectives apart from ensuring the smooth running of the club itself, and so would yield a wide range of opinions on any issue put to them; vigorous discussion of a single topic would, however, be unlikely to be continued with the commitment which might be due to it, al though a perusal of the club's archives vould probably indicate a preoccupation with a limited nt.-unber of recurring thernes during the course of its history. The lack of unity among the ideals of mernbers inevitably leads to issues of policy being decided on purely pragmatic grounds, with little thought for long term goals. The lack of commitment from the majority of individual mernbers results in policy being decided by the dedicated (but often ideologically extreme) few. The menbers thanselves are therefore responsible for (albeit unconsciously) ceding a considerable degree of the control of their owrr institute to the salaried officials whom they have appointed for day—to—day administration. Put at its simplest, anyone receiving sufficient payment to enable then to work full—time for the RIBA automatically gains a certain priority over any of the institu±ds elected representatives, a priority which, once established soon extends to the field of infomation — of access to it and control of the access of others to it (for example, by deciding which matters should be voted on and which should be given simply as items of information. ) In the course of time, the advantages accruing from the ability to devote ones' time wholly to the institute increase, as the salaried officials become acknowledged as the major repositories of infonnation relating to information affairs; the long—term nature of their appointrnents (relative to the more limitec periods of service pennitted for the elected representatives) accentuate this situation. Thus the background information required by members of Council and committees is often obtainable only from the paid officials, who thus act as an (unconscious) filter of the information available. In addition the offici because of their reservoir of information, automatically become the people best suited to influential tasks such as committee selection and chosen to advise outside bodies (for instance MCUK, on educational matters). Thus those appointed to execute policy eventually become the prime makers Of policy, because of the mechanism of the systan in which they operate. Hence the common student understandhg of the RIBA is erroneous. On the one hand, the RIBA of Portland Place is not consciously malicious since it consists, by and large, of people whose task is to keep the present machinery running as smoothly as possible so that menbers can get on with their own jobs of designing schools in Stockton-on-Tees (or buidling motels in Mecca: obviously the people who secure these posts tend to be those who are trust- worthy and hardworking, but not subversive. on the other hand, the RIBA has 12 not disappeared off the face of the earth and does control an elaborate and, at times, powerful administrative mechanism whose existence needs to be recognised. THE IMPLICATIONS FOR ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION I personally bel leve that the "RIBA" which influences architectural education resembles the model which I have outlined above more closely any other model that I have yet come across. Education is therefore being influenced by a largely unco—ordinated body, representing a collection of disparate ideals (an inherent virtue as much as an inherent weakness) , lacking long term goals, and often self—contradictory, or — despite the gravity of the issues raised — even fickle. The truth is not that policy issues forth form a consolidated nucleus but that it is fought out arnong the strongest personalities present (in each of the respective committee), a few ofwhom should be forced to admit to considerable self —interest in these matters. But as for any conspiracy theory, nothing could be furhter from the truth — the RIBA is perhaps the body least able to manage that. As one Council member remarked, "It's daft enough trying to get two architects to agree on which pub they' 11 go to, let alone trying to get sixty of them to agree on anything more abstract than that." The sad thing is that decisions rnade in such an AMATEUR fashion can then be executed all too proficiently. Fears that the RIBA is deliberately harming architectural education are misfounded; instead concern should centre upon the fact that decisions of major import fall into the hands of a body for whom such issues are beyond its capability (and for the majority of whose men-bers such issues lie beyond their concern) . The aspect, however, which has led to a greater number of sleepless nights has been that of the danger which arises in the absence of any consensus, for on this vacuum the strongest oratory rhetoric wins — and oratory rhetoric, unfortunately, 14 best convince the voters when at their rost extreme. Too rnany desisions THE MEANS BY WFffCH THE RIBA ACTS IN FIELD OF ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION. are thus influenced by the personal desires of an eloquent speaker of gaining promtion, pushing his/her practice, etc.) or by the degree to which a particular If one asks an informed student how they think the RIBA influences architectural line of thinking lends itself to exposition through is medium (of oratory) hence education they are bound to reply "through the Visiting Board"; ask a mernber the rise, during the 60's,of university—based, academically — orientated architec of the staff the same question and they will probably agree but add togd:her education. with rrore direct presswe on their heads. These are the means by which the RIBA overtly claims to be influencing the quality of architectural education, The means of executing policy also influence the way in which policy is devised but the extent to which this is what really happens in practice is highly since those responsible for the execution policy are usually consulted in the cour questionable. of its forrnation. Their contributions are those of the people who need clear ordei from which to work, and so they will favour policies which are easily grasped and To start with, if the RIBA claims were true one could only sumise that it is can be straightforwardly executed — the times that I have been told 'tif you bungling the whole affair. The selection of Visiting Boards, a suspiciously want to get to it through, surnmarise it in a small number of points, each private affair to an outsider (including many heads of schools: ) , is in fact explicit in terms of how it can be put into action". There is no place for the far from conspi±atorial; instead it is arranged by an efficient mernber of the subtleties, nuances of paradoxes of red life here, for the acceptance of the grea RIBA bureaucracy who is mre concerned with getting through an excessive number inevitable, imperfection. of visits than with the appropriatesess of each board for its particular visit. Consequently the Visiting Boards are made up of people known to the RIBA At this point it is worth nothing that the policies emitted from 66 Portland administration (that is those who sit on RIBA committees and therefore enter Place are not representative of the RIBA membership nor auld they ever so Portland Place most frequently) rather than those whose whose abilitities in design owing to its substantially apathetic condition ) . The lesson successful activists or teaching would make them the rrost suitable people for this task of assessment. at the RIBA have learnt is that, unless you are prepared to pin all your hopes on No wonder schools are often faced by a Visiting Board whose members are of your own powers of oratory and rhetoric, you are best off evading the cornmittees; significantly lower calibre than the schools own external examiners: How the RIBA the success stories of the RIBA ( Student Employment Bureau,. Energy Calculator, etc can seriously expect a school to take heed of a report criticising the schools have come to pass simply because an individual in each case stopped playing the lack of "practicality" when the chair man of the board concerned has not practised committee game and got the job done outside that system. Evading the committees for several years beats me — almost as much as does the quiet acceptance of the is not necessarily bad in itself (particulary as the sort Of"democraey" involves report often exercised by such a school: To add insult to injury, the board of in drawing up these committees does not bear looking into) but this technique a particular visit is not even selected from this (defective) list with much also adopted by people who, for less honourable reasons, are scared that their reference to its suitability for question but rather on the basis of which mernbers ideas would not survive eposure to committees. Under these conditions evading of the board can make the -date already selected for that visit. committees (or creating new ones) can be a ploy for pursuing and even realising an idea without it being brought to light. The RIBSAts handling of heads of the schools meetings has been amateur in a Simi way. In the past year such meetings have, on two occasions, been arranged so that they clashed with an important Visiting Board (in the first instance thus preventing 4 heads from attending the heads meeting: At another of these meetings a head who is highly respected by the RIBA felt compelled to expose the invalidity of the statistics it was putting forward, thus leaving it without; any grounds for its arguementl These examples are typical and go to illustrate how the RIBA is operating in an amateur, rather than conspiratorial, fashion despite the gravity (which acknowledges itself of the issues dealt with by the Visiting Board, and of the effect which the report has upon the future of the school. As I hinted earlier, my greatest surprise is that the RIBA's "control" is accepted by the schools at all. The RIBA is, after all, only putting on a very sucessful act which gives the impression that their Visiting Board is the sole body legally responsible for validating schools. Close examination of the ARCUK act is discouraged by the RIBA since it shows only too clearly that the Emperor has no clothesl Looking at the willingness with which heads meekly submit to these visits I sometimes wonder what sort of people are rnost likely to become heads of schools. I am far more worried however, that matters of great import (e.g. standards of entry to schools) are still decided behind closed doors in the RIBA's own Education and Practice Execut:ive Committee. I will refrain from going into depth but simply comment that these meetings are at times qutie farcical ( 'tembarassing" was the word used by an eminent. mernber) and are the apothesis% of the oratory—and rhetoric syndrome, in this case used by eloquent men to put over extremist views on practitioners innocent of the educational consequences• Furthermore EPDC hæ a nasty to subrnit reports to council merely as information, not (as do all other comnittees) as issues for voting on• 16 PROPOSALS FOR ACTION The decisions as to where to go from here rust be yours, but you now have a moi.-e realistic background from which to work, the important thing is to be sensitive to the existing situation so as not to provoke opposition unnecessarily. One must remember that the people responsible for operating the system have been chosen for their post precisely because of their abilities to keep the rtEchine running smoothly, so that any attempt to change the machine itself will not exactly meet with support from them—if concerned they react in an extreme manner They have their own jobs to consider, jobs which rrdght radically change or even pass out of existe nce, in a new system. On realising (even unconsciously) these consequences certain ( human) reactions will be inevitable. It mast be rembered that these people have served their employer well and are extremely dedicated, hardworking and sincere — if misguided. As such, they deserve a certain amount of respect. Its necessary to look at the situation without prejudice, with sympathy and understanding, and with a certain degree of self—examination as well one must take into consideration the faults on both sides. Perhaps it is appropriate to close with some recent words of Alistair Cooke' s: "In times of confusion people like to claim to stereotypes — the simpler the better. People are always hazy about characters that don't fit their precon— ceptions". I hope the warning is heeded. 17 Robin Nichol son July 1978 Some problems raised by the revived interest in the Part—time mode of educatin architects. The progressive specialisation of the architect as the designer, rather than executor, of buildings has been paralleled by the progressive isolation of his/her education. Delusions about the inherently progressive nature of formal education can no longer be offered as support for the attempts to raise academic standards for architects following the 1958 Oxford Conference. The last twenty years has seen no improvement' in architectural standards but rather the most dazzling display of designing—for— profit accompanied by a loss of many traditional architectural and constructional skills. One of the necessary' side effects of the Oxford Conference was to slowly kill off most of the part—time courses in architecture (1). 1978 finds a renewed interest in the part—time mode (2) but we need to examine this in the same manner as we would a full—time course what are the objectives of the particular educational process ; what is the architect 's role; what is the function of architectural design? The part—time mode would seem to offer the possibility of an integration of theory (in college) and practice (in the office) and our experience at the Polytechnic of North London, where the first new 4—year part—time BSc in Architecture has just graduated its first students, seems to support this fertile possibility. The following personal observations are based on two years t experience at PNL teaching exclusively on the part—time course, which does not set out to challenge the relevance of the architect' as the proper designer of buildings, but which does attempt to make the students aware of the complex social relations within which buildings are made and the part played by the architect in this The PNL Part—time Degree Course (3) The Part 1 Exemption and BSc is achieved after 4 hard years work, attending the Poly one long day each week for 29 weeks a year and 2 two—week periods full time each year. The course itself is in general outline fairly traditional and is dominated by the practice of design in projects ; however it is more consciously conceived as a four year sequence of design projects and attempts to develop teaching techniques for the mature part—time student. The day release assumes enormous importance for the students , some of whom have travel led long distances to attend and it is, consequently, tailored as neatly as possible: the morning and evening are spent in lectures sandwiching the studio afternoons spent in individual or group activities . The full—time period allows more complex activities to develop eg. workshop experience, or a community study etc. Any applicant must have either the traditional 5 O t s and 2 A t s, or an I-NC/HND or a first degree in another subject or an ONC at 60% or over ; we are also allowed to accept 10% (ie. 3 per year) without any formal qualifications — these places are hotly contested. Selection is by interview for which the students are invited to produce evidence of t creative potential' , which is very widely interpreted. The average age on entry is about 27 —this maturity tending to produce high motivation, though also some heightened anxiety (there being more to lose if unsuccessful ) Slightly in excess of 50% are qualified technicians although often this route seems to have been recommended by schools and colleges against the student's early desire to become an architect. The year is composed from as broad a range of experience and skills as possible — the graduate from another discipline, the ex—serviceman, the foreign student and women students being enthusiastically welcomed. (4) The students' office responsibilities range from the most junior (29 + years old) draftsperson to associate partners . Recognising this rich diversity of experience and skills, the first year of the course is seen as a foundation year, going back to re—examine many aspects of our knowledge, looking at the world we inhabit through art, music, mathematics, sociology, psychology, and the progress of scientific discovery. This provides a challenging framework for a sequence of design and communication exercises. The first year of the course could be considered to be the start of a process of opening visual and intellectual windows in an atmosphere of creative discovery and is much enjoyed by both staff and students. Sharing of one another's skills is fostered from the beginning, although we have not been able to eliminate com— petitiveness completely. We are trying to adopt similar techniques to examine architectural production through analytical exercises coupled with design projects, though this is in a very early stage of developmen t. 19 The Educational Process If I may digress slightly, I would like to discuss part of our interviewing experience. Firstly, we have been surprised to learn from some prospective students' portfolios the ease with which Big Capital sidesteps the architectural profession and uses draftspeople often skilled but in no way conscious of the mysteries (5) of architecture and therefore unlikely to produce aesthetic' or other objections to the most brazen profit—taking (6). Secondly we are constantly, though perhaps rather naively amazed at the number of people who have been educationally shipwrecked, who whether from prejudice, excess pressure or plain ignorance, have been effectively excluded from developing their talents and discouraged from discovering how (to continue) to find and explore themselves . This exclusion is often reinforced, psychologically, to such an extent that the person loses all faith in his/her own abilities beyond that which he/she knows ; in the world of architecture the architect becomes someone held in awe even if not respected by others lower down the educational ladder. This situation bears great resemblance to that confronted by Freire and others with their adult literacy schemes in Latin one peasant recalls "When all this land belonged to one 'Latifundio there was no reason to read and write. We weren't responsible for anything. The boss gave the orders and we obeyed . now it is all different and another "Before we were blind, now the veil has fallen from our eyes . (7 )The difference is that while the technician is a 'qualified' person, that qualification is often at the expense of 'understanding' ; after all the 'wise man' (woman) has (rightly) been identified as a liability to the future employer, and more broadly educational systems are usually devised to support rather than challenge the status quo. The background to our interest in the part—time mode. 21 Our present focus of interest in architecture and architectural education springs from our realization of the need for the exposure and analysis of recent and all too often lamentable architectural practice, the current stylistic confusion and the complete sell— out by the profession to the, admittedly powerful , demands of Capital and State. The nature of British education and its central task of socio—economic stratification makes it structurally self—destructive for the high performer (intellectually the best equipped?) to challenge the status quo ; whereas if the low performer t s achievement level is sufficiently strongly reinforced (as suggested above) then he/ she is equally unlikely to challenge the status quo within the established order. We observed that the high performance evel student had the confidence, that comes with comparative success but often also had the disdain and cynicism that prohibits opening the mind to understanding ; whereas, although the part—timer may lack some intellectual confidence, he/she does have the lifeexperience against which to assess and measure not only the education offered but also the architectural production of the office in which he/she is working in parallel Although we attempt to direct some of the mature students t energy and experience into questioning their office r s design practice, it would be foolish of us not to recognise that one important objective of our students on entry is to qualify and thus achieve a higher social status . For those students of working class origin, we, un— wittingly, enable and sometimes even force, them to acquire bourgeois social skills and interests, while at the same time asking the students to examine critically the designed world in which they live. This contradiction energises the course as it is presently developing but must pose as a central problem for any radical education group (such as NAM may develop. ) Within the student the existing from a working social class and political background system,is necessarily engaged in transforming his/her social status by means of an educational process working devised in our society, by class that with particularly, system t sufficient to provide to t skills introduce t stability for thet As we know certain sectors are educated, some into the professions where their primary function is necessarily to serve state/capital desirable to consider alternative 'products' Is it and does the part-time student t s real life experience offer him/her a potential for a new kind of designer, a fighter for a new set of social relations in the construction industry? recognising this possibility, we must also recognise the present state of our schools : we are optimistic. nevertheless, just sometimes, Footnotes (1 ) According to RIBA statistics in 1957/58 713 students entered 1st Year of Part—time courses (incorporating Day and Evening Students . ) (cf. 894 in full—time courses) . in 1967/68 118 students entered 1st year of Part—time courses. (cf. 1342 in full—time courses) . in 1977/78 116 students entered 1st year of Part—time courses . (cf. 1422 in full—time courses. ) (2) The 6 part—time Part 1 courses currently running are Leicester Polytechnic Certificate Mackintosh School, Glasgow University & School of Art Certificate North East London Polytechnic (NELP) BSc (Hons. ) Polytechnic of North London (PNL) BSc Polytechnic of South Bank (PSB) Gr adu ate Diploma Thames Polytechnic (Woolwich) Diploma (3) There is a 3—year Part-time Part 2 Diploma Course at PNL: there are also Part 2 courses at Leicester, Thames, NELP, and in preparation at Mackintosh School. (4) There seem to be very few women students who are willing and able to pursue the part—time course. It would not be surprising to find positive dis— couragement by both school and employer. Their absence makes it more difficult to challenge the 'macho t character of so many male students. (5) I chose this term carefully, partly to remind us that architectural design used to be in the exclusive hands of the masons and their mysterious orders and partly to emphasise the mystification of architectural design by today's professionals. (6) We recently interviewed a skilled but architecturally illiterate technician, who had single—handed designed in two weeks middle a 5000—bed east package hospital deal complexThis for a prospective situation is not uncommon. (7) FRIERE, Paolo, cultural Action for Freedom in.1972. Pengu Paper prepared following a meeting of the NAM education group in Cardiff 1—2 July 1978 to discuss the desirability and/or feasibility of such a group. 22 Architectural Education and • Building Britain's Future' lain Campbell June 1978 Introduction This paper makes no attenpt to discuss in detail the recorrmendations for architectural education made by the Labour Party's Working Group on Construction in their paper Building Britain's Future. Instead it deals with the within which they locate their proposals. I argue that they correctly identify the myopia of the profession's view of education and offer an alternative standpoint from which to view education. A view which, although It has considerable merit in that it avoids a 'narrowly professional approach' does not provide an adequate basis from which to begin work on education within the New Architecture Movanent. If your aquaintance with the Labour Party's policy staternent 'Building Britain Future' Is through the architectural and construction press you might be forgiven for believing that all it is concerned with is nationalising the construction and building materials companies. Tie Architects' Journal' misunderstood the docunent: when it stated that • "Reform of the construction professions is part of the National Executive Committee's policy of national Ising major areas of the industry" (1) Both these proposals, reform of the professions and nationalisatlon, are, however, only part of a series of recommendations which are the end result of an analysis of the construction industry which takes as its starting point a particular view of the construction industry and its products. This view, stated simply, sees a double role for the construction industry. It has a social function as; • the crucial physical link between the Labour movenent's aspirations, in such fields as housing, health and education, and their achievanent" (2) 24 And an economic function because; "the regeneration of British industry which the Labour Party seeks cannot be achieved without the modernisation and replacement of obsolete Industrial bUi1d1ngs and infra structure" (3) At present, however, the industry is ill equipped to fulfil these functions for a variety of reasons and the proposals are aimed at restructuring it to enable it to play its role more fully and efficiently. surprisingly the organisation and education of the construction professions is one of the areas which comes in for criticism in this context and the architectural profession, in particular, is singled out In many of the examples given. me main direction of their argument is that; "For tw centuries now design of buildings has grown up quite separately from their production" (4) Tney see this separat:ion as a major factor in the inefficiency of an eytcznely fragmented industry. The need to bridge the separation of design and construction in order to produce a building has resulted in a lot of practices which are based on mutual mistrust and inhibit 'genuine co—operation' An R.I.B.A. official's view of the contract procedures is given to support this position (5). In addition the division between design and production produces problerns in achieving and maintaining adequate technical standards Professional education is looked at In this context. It is seen as one factor which reproduces this separation: "The Institutional separation between design and production is reinforced by a syste•n of education for architects and others which is narrowly 'professional' in outlook". (7) Courses, thenselves, controlled by the various professional institutions (8) anbodY this outlook and tend to give; inadequate attention both to production aspects and to the wider social context of professional work. They rarely offer any practical experiz•ce In the building industry, restrict entry to those with high—status acadenic qualifications, and give inadequate attention to the need, in an ever—changing technical environ— ment for mid—career retraining". (9) In order to counteract the limited understanding of the industry produced by professional education they propose that ; "The education of construction professionals should be taken out of the hands of professional instutions and cont-rolled by a body representing the whole industry, perhaps the Construction Industry Training Board (10) mese proposals on education are not important in thanselves. There is no evidence that the Col.T.B. could educate architects any less narrowly than professional institutes. The pmposals have to be examined in the context of the Labour Party's total approach to the problens of the industry, an approach which does not look for piecemeal reforms but is directed at finding a comprehensive solution. Any approach v.hich N.A.M. adopts must, similarly, locate education in a wider social framework. The great strength of the Labour Party's analysis is that it sees architectural practice as only one practice in the building industry, and one which is related to, not separated frorn, the others. Architectural education can be seen as a part of the education of all who work in the industry and education as a part of the process of moulding a construction industry with different methods and objectives than it has at present. It is a simple logical argument to note that the category of architect or designer is rooted in the production of buildings. If society did not produce buildings then there could. not possibly be any architects. The converse, however, is not necessarily true. Because we live in a society which produces buildings we do not necessarily need a group (or groups) of people whose sole occupation Is to design then (or aspects of then). me category of designer arises out of the production of buildings but it does not do so in the abstract. It is the production of buildings in a certain way which produces the separate category of designer, and the separation of this category into a host of specialist design professionals of which architects are only one. A movement for a •new architecture' implies a movernent for a change In the relationship of production of building and a necessary corollary of this is a change in the sort of people who take part in the production of buildings and therefore in the system of educating t.hose who take part in the production of buildings. I would argue that the Labour Party's outline of the need to change the relation— ship of separation between design and production, their identification of some of the trends within the indust:ry which are acting to break dowrr separation (11) and a cmcial need for changes in the education systan to help in this, indicate a position, outside the professional cocoon, which we could usefully adopt as one starting point for developing our ov.rn positions. If rBui1ding Britain's Future' is strong in one aspect of its analysis, it is weak in terms of another aspect which is equally important for N.A.M. That is the separation between those involved In the design and construction of buildings and the people who are going to use them. There are no references, in the surunary of recorrunendatlons, to the need to change the relationship between users and builders, although there are two references in the main text. "The quality of design is of course a social as well as a purely aesthetic Issue' and improvanents should also be sought through greater responsiveness to the community in planning procedures". (12) 26 "Reintegration must take place within a context of widened accountability to society for what is built". (13) They give a clue as to their meaning of 'responsiveness' and 'accæntability• in the sentence which immediately follows the last quote: "We would envisage a growing pattern of creative negotiation between public clients on the one hand — their bargaining position strengthened by t.he creation of a Public Procuranent Agency — and integrated design/producuon teams, in both public and private sectors of contracting, on the other". (14) In effect they are, on the one hand, at:ternptlng to break dovm the Institutional separation of design and construction that results In and is perpetuated by current educational practice whilst, on the other hand, increasing the institutionalisation of the separation of user and builder. The closest that the Labour Party gets to the users of the products of their social programme is a consideration of the 'public client' . In their discuxssion they make considerable use of the report 'The Public Client and the Construction Industries'. (15) This report does refer to users. "In some public authorities it may be that there is an ultimate client who is the intended user of the building, but another body may be acting on its behalf as the client in regard to the building process. In local governrnent the end user of a public sector project is generally represented by a main sponsor cotmüttee, consisting of elected members or departmental representatives". (16) It does not, however, examine the relationship between this client body and the users. I would argue that just as we must step outside a narrowly professional outlook of the relationship between designer and builder so must we find a way of avoiding what we might call a narrowly professional concept of client. The current educational process reproduces and is reproduced by the professional concept of client just as surely as the separation of designer and builder. The Labour Party do not offer us a starting point in this area, and I cannot add anything except to note that the work and experience of those, like the Support Group, who are exploring ways of practicing which do have a different concept of 'client' , may be able to provide us with direction. In this paper I have indicated what I consider to be the strengths and weaknesses In the Labour Party's approach to architectural education in order to show that the approach which N.A.M adopts must begin from a standpoint which locates architectural pract:ice In its social context. 27 28 References 1. Architects' Journal, 19 Oct 1977, p. 773 2. Labour Party, Buildinq Britain's Future: Labour's Policy on Construction Labour Party October 1977, ISBN 0-900507-99-3, p.57 3. Ibid. p. 7 4. Ibid. p. 19 5. t There is a general acceptance that the signing of the contract is the signal for the battle between the various parties — contractors, sub— contractors, suppliers, and the various professionals — to commence, a battle which soon develops into a continuous tactical garne of catch— as—catch—can, and hard luck on the one left holding the baby when the music stops' , quoted in Labour Party (1977) p. 20. 6. They do not deal with in any depth but note that it is a problematic area v•hich will have to be examined in the future. See p. 20 Ibid. p. 19 8. m-aey make no mistake in identifying the R.I.B.A., and not A.R.C.U.K, as the controlling institution in the case of architectural education. See p.53 9. Ibid. p.54 10. Ibid, p.63, recommendation No. 54 11. See their discussion on design—and—build and package deals. p.53 12. Ibid. p. 55 13. Ibid. p.53 Ibid. p.53 15. Building and Civil Engineering Economic Development Committees, Tne Public Client and the Construction Industries, H.M.S.O. 1975, ISBN 0—11—700739—0. 16. Ibid. p. 25 29 IbQPESSIOI!S or ?ODEL E : an exploratory paper into some of the relation— ships between architectural education and the vorking class student. Manr Grills Frank Horton Robb MacDonald Liverpool University School of Architecture. June 1978. Introduction The recent DES discussion paper 'Higher Education in the 1990's' (1) points out some future problems of the higher education sector: problems brought about by democraphic changes. In the longer term, demand for university education vill fall and the DDS offers several alternative strategies to meet this crisis. One of these strategies (and the one preferred by most commentators) is that referred to a 'Model . This strateor consists of .taking positive steps as a matter of social Folic" to encourare perticipation by children of non— manual workers • Our puroose in this paper, is to consider sone o? the issues '.rhich grov out of the 'Model E strategy. We do this since ve believe thet, very broadly, this is the proper way for hither education to go although •re vould separate this from the g.enenl demographic approach of the Brown Paper. The setting of our aroment is the one ve knov best: a university school of architecture. Vie shall not, in this paper, question the idea o? architectural education as qualification for practice. We assune that there is e valid rationale for becoming an architect through the present preferred route. Thig assumption is, we believe weak: the idea of profassional exclusivity is debatable and the position of full time educetion as a sole route to practice is tmtenable. iiowever, ve vant to use the existing structure to raise questions and accept it without condoning it. Education is a biographical process: there are social and economic influences but these are brought to bear and make themselves felt in the life cycle of indivi duals. We have no hard general informvtion but present a factual, partly fictitious ease stua•.r of Joe-r Bishop, a working class kid vho makes the architectural grade. We shil use critical incidents in Joey's life to raise '-energi questions about architectural education. Joey bishop is an architect, he ves trained at Liverpool thiversity School of Architecture. He is the only child of Josenh and Mary P,ishio; josenh is charcehand in a local factory, Vary owns a small knitwear shon. They're a Liverpool family, the most prosperous and com-Cortably off in their neighbourhood. They own their own terraced house, and Joey's first real job is to process an improvement grant application for his parent's house. Joey was born and brought up in a ttro bedroom terraced house vith no bathroom and an outside toilet. He attended the locei state primary school, he vas a vell behaved and hislll.y regarded pupil. He vas expected to pass the 11+ and go on to the local grarmar school. 30 ile are drawing a portrait of the scholarship boy from a 'respectable' working class home. The majority of the working class university entrants come from homes like this. They are selected early and feted by the system. The quiet manner and good behaviour are probably as important hag it as rough. ability 'The in evidencemaking this selection; the rough kid from the rough hime suggests that from a fairly early ace lov status members are taught to narrow their social horizons.! Parkin ( 3). Not surprising, the school system is, for its egalitarian pretensions, part of a larger class society. In 1962 Joey failed the 11+ examination — and already classified by the system as a failure. Rather than the local Collegiate or Institute, it vas Earle Road Secondary 14caem School. "Never mind Joey, there iB alvqys the 13+," his mother had said. The 13+ never took place for Joey, and that vas how much his mum knew about education. In fact, Earle Road's greatest claim to fane wag a first division footballer. 110 selection system is perfect, the selective system pretends to be modelled on demand but what happens if more people pass than the selective schools have places? joey could also be a late developer. Things started to happen for Joey in his first year at secondary school; 'he vorked vell and fully deserved his high position in class' (to quote his school report). lie never asked Mary questions, but just got on and did things consistently well. To his teachers Joey vas a good pupil from a good home, he was never in trouble, and a-IvQvs conscientious .head prefect material. VThen he vas Joey's parents visited the school and were told that Joey stood a good chance of doing quite vell at C.S.E.. They were impressed and sav a bright future for their son, they didn't know what C.S.E. was but it vas a certificate, a qualification, enough to keep Joey away from the docks or Fords. Certainly this tended to vipe out Joey's previous failure at eleven. The C. S.E. and the Comprehensive would be Joey's 'saviour t . Mr. James, the voodvork teacher, vho had 'had more hot dinners than you have sawn vood' , vas very influencial on Jcey's development. Surrounded by spoke shaves and planes Joey wag in his element. It ves the doing that vas important and not the thinking about it. Mr. James talked a lot about the virtues of education and joey vas impressed. Secondary school years passed vithout Joey thinking about them. Top of the cless after top of the class. Bad only at English (poor spelling) he shone et geogrephy and technical drawing. It vas suggested that he could aim high for a job as a draughtsman. education for ti•'hile different schools will occupations be continue unequal to bearing and serve hence a different class t unjust society, t rewards . t (L)selecting end different and training orestige,personnel During this time at secondary school Joey began to reveal the classic traits Of 'Hogcarts' scholarghip boy, his great strengths vere consistency and conscientiousness. ( 5) . Joey did vell at C.S.E. Enclish Language 2, English Literature 1, Geography 1, Maths 1, Woodwork 1, Technical and Engineering Drawing 1' Physics 1. C.S.E. had been good for Joey; continual assessment nearly all project vork with little exphasis on vritten examinations helped a poor exam performance and rewarded his consistent effort. One of the failings of Joey's secondary education that it didn't make him very literate. t There are certain gross a.nd crushing disabilities • • w place the classes experiencing them at a disadvantade with those not (6) 31 of C.f.. G. B. C.E. vag 'O' introduced level work. as a Their target popularity for the less can able, be seen those a.s thoucht an aspect to of be our incapablesocial obsess-xon with grading, as a vay of labelling the second class citizen or, as vith Joey, a publically recoenised escape route. Joey moves to a local comprehensive to take 'A' levels. 'Ever thoucht about doing some 'A' levels Joey?' the geography teacher had asked. In for a penny in for a pound Joey thoueht. His C.S.E. results vere no surprise to Joey's Enclish teacher, they were a bit of a surprise to Joey but more than anything else he didn't really have any idea vhat vas going on. However, and perhaps more importantly, no one explained what it vas all about. In fact it wasn't until his later years of university education that he really understood what matriculation meant. The femily had misgivings, perhaps Joey was aiming too high. However the school fought hard for a trial year at the comprehensive. And so it vas off to Anfield Comprehensive School with his C.S.E. certificate in hend. Joey's step on to the comprehensive rung can be traced back in time, certainly as far back as the 1914b Education Act, and perhaps before. The 1911 1; Education Act summeriged and consolidated a Ione oeriod of experiment and controversy in English education. The tripartite system institutionalised a very simple model of the class structure, one type of education for vorkers, another for technicians end one for managers. The selection system vas produced to guarantee that segregation was based on c horses for courses principle. The emphasis vas on the individual; the system vas designed as a ladder to help the individual to better himself. Clearuy the optimis:a of 1924b was naive; the great social refom vent sour very quickly. There was a flood o? remedies; comprehensives, new foms of examination, compensatory prograxnmes and research. The problem became clear; the solution remained remote. Joey's first task at the Comprehensive vas to decide vhich 'A' levels to try for. Joey had been zood at Geography and had enjoyed the projects associated with it. , so it wag Geography 'A' level for him. Ge010f7 vas interesting and there were plenty of field trips so he had a stab at that as veil. fiovever, before Joey could get on with his 'A' levels he had to cet one 'O t level in English. After tvo attempts he succeeded ia passinz with a grade 5. Whatever came later, this, perhaps more than proved to be the greatest failing of Joey' 3 education. At the bezinning o.C the upper sixth, nan-or of his school mates vere considerina teachers training colleges, polytechnics and universities. The hea&naster at Anfield thought it might be worth Joey trying out application for tmiversity in addition to the technical colleges and polytechnics he trying for. What to apply for? The only possibility seemed to be planning, vell geocraphy and planning went t0Rether. Six choices of universities doing undergraduate planning. degrees Cbeffield, Birminchnn Aston, Heriot Newcastle, Cardiff, Menchester. No offers, no interviews in fact nothing. Joey felt hard done Brixton Collece of Building mode hin an offer of C t s and so did the local polytechnic, so Joey -cet his mind on one of those, at least, that was until September and the t A' level results came along.. Joey got an P. and a b. The staff at Anfield thought it vou1d be a good idea to go to tmiversity, but it wasn't as easy as that. To the outside world the entry procedure for university must seem like a complicated lotterj. Despite UCCA it is inscrutable end co:nplex. 32 Then cue September 1970, and the UCCA clearing scheme; Course Code 5100, Architecture, Liverpool School of Architecture — Without knowing what 'architecture' vas Joey vas off on his architectural education. The accidental choice of career is common, is it right? 'Architecture, what's architecturett Joey thought. The postman brought him an answer on September 29th 1970 from the School of Architecture, in the fom of a programe of pre—tem work. A book list, from which Joey vas to select two and write an essQ.r. Joey vas at a disadventage. The letter also asked him to make a diary about his thoughts and reactions in observing and some desigred artifact. a Artifact? t joey thought. liis confusion vag made worse by the helpful clarification . ...anything from a teaspoon to a city. The jargon of architectural education is introduced early on in a student % education, even before he arrives at the school of architecture. In Jaki Howes paper at York, with reference to the RIBA publication 'Schools of Architecture Recognised by the RIBA' , she asks t h01' does someone not femilar vith jargon choose between 'Architectural Design, Design Sc.ience and Context of Design t at Portsmouth and tilistory and Design Process, Theory and Practice of Building (including structural design), Environmental Science Management at Nottingham? (7) Joey vrote about a high rise block of flats for his pre—tem He noted the simplicity and symmetry of the design. He wrote about the external facade of the block of flats, the surface patterns, colourg and textures. Even at this stace, with only a rev preconceptions, Joey assumed architecture was something to do with facades. de thought little of his home surroundings, a house without a bathroom in an area suffering planning blight. lie thought nothing about the community. In fact, despite living at home he was to become increasingl.y separated from his home background. He vas progressively cut off from the life of his social group and raniIy; neither was he a member of the 'street gang' and, even at university, sex cane late for Joey. After all, he did his homevork. Those first fev weeks at university consisted of much talk vith t artifact desicners' and a sociologist. Joey didn't say much, he vas conscious of the vay he spoke. In fact he just kept auiet, and read t Farn.ily and kinship in East London' • Entry to tmiversity is e taken for grented experience, ve assume that the trp..nsition is easy from a fairly self—directed VIth form to a verv self— directed institution. Selection ennbles us to asstme habits stuQy and work, and catholicity of interest and commitment to the subject of stuQv. It might have benn a problem for Joey that t a university is a place orcanised round talk' (8), but Joey vas taught that architectural education in the university school vas different. He vas able to get along without much talking and explaining, just drawing, and he vas surprised at the nuaber o? issues drawing can hide. vou1d Joey thouziit consistently be that O.K..his fie voodvork eauated knew he would architecture had done be useful. well with at technical Unfortunately, drawing, so drawing he that thouc,ht and wasn'thehe the case. The graphic artist, from the school of art knev hov to draw, 33 Joey thought, or at least it sounded aa if he did. Joey never sav him draw. One of Joey's first projects had something to do with the 'consid— eration of a line' . As for his voodvork experience, well that vagn 't really on either. The year Joey arrived at the school of architecture the one and only craftsman turned technician into vas a glorified being laid model off. making Whilst room Joey vith vas at a little the school used vind the vorkshoptunnel in one corner. Architecture must have something to do with buildings Joey thought, but people et the school of architecture kept telling him it vas more than just buildings. In fact, during his first week in the school, Joey cane to in the the polytechnic.conclusion that it vas architecture in the l.miversity and buildings Joey never learnt what more there vas in architecture than buildings althov,h he was very successfull.y taught to do architecture. In fact if he had been able to learn anything it might have been that there is nothing more in architecture than buildings. For a short time folk singing, .record.q, vine coffee till the early hours became part of Joey's life. 'An occasional visit to the halls o? residence to visit friends' . He replacea hic ?ootba11 scarf vith a school of architecture scarf and stopoed 'going to the match' on Saturday afternoon. Obviously Joey tried hard socially. He had the veneer, but never the privilege of intelligence, the books at home and the articulate conversation. He didn 't have the accent, the confidence, the social background related to enterinc the professions. the chances of Joey doing vell are refuced, but there are many more who (ion 't even have his chances. In his second year Joey questioned the value of a sketch desi,31 for a community centre in an area of high rise housing, when the local had said that they did not vant one. At the extemal reviev of his vork, the examiner suggested that Joey got on with what he vas told to do vithout questioning projects. After being told to concentrate on working, a language he knev veil, Joey kept a low profile. His drawing skills developed to a fine art he dre%' his way through two first class honours det'rees. Professionü practice part three examinations slotted in, but that aspect is another story. After fifteen years of 'graft' , Joey had made it; an architect. To Joey the school of architecture vas no different thnn secondary school or the comprehensive, a series o? hurdles,the scholarship fence vhich he jumped by manipulating masses of . He acquired facts rather than handling and using them. Ile was rot pushed to think differently, to experiment to learn but he only used a small pert of his personality. In this respect the school of architecture neither helped him nor hindered him. To quote Her±ert Spencer it encouraged 'submissive receptivity instead of independent activity' . (5) There is little now by way of real comment since knov very little about hov universities actually do their job. At the end of the course Joey is vell on his way to beinc a fU11y paid up member of the bourceousie — hov that happens ve don't know. 34 To summarise, Joey vas taught a mmber of lesgong:— The social skills of party going and conversation. b. The patina of cultivated languv,e. c. iiig drive to work and echieve vas reinforced. d. He vas alienated, skills and he drawn had acquired avay from vere his home too open; background.design e. The practical skills must be arcane. This is a partial list which can be summed up by saving that a university is not merely a knowledge transmitting machine it is algo a socialising mechanism. Socialisation is a complex and subtle pert of the architectural education process, ill understood and difficult to research. Architectural education can be seen to be a part o? the process of 'reproduction' ; the means of continually re— creating and maintaining the architects position in a class society. For all the student agitation ve have a good track record in producing unquestioning professionals. CONCLWIONS We titled this paper t Some impressions deliberately not to claim expertise. Therefore, ve conclude vith some points vorth further discussion. Some concluding discussion points:— liov valid is Monel E as a education strategy? 2. 'Jas Joey culturally deprived or from a different culture? 3. Hov- vill Joey practice architecture? Is Joey real and general? 5. 'chat do schools of architecture teach and what do students learn? Are any of Joey's problems likely to be met a mature entrant? 7. Will universities need to char.ze their if :todel E becomes reality? 3. Ithat vill a radical Architectural educEtion 100k like? 'Ilov a society selects, classifies, distributes, transmits and evaluates the educational knowledge it considers to be public, reflects both the distribution of pover and the principles of social control. (9) 35 REFERENCES 1. Department of Education and Science. 'Higher Education in the 1990's. London 1978. 2. (D.E.S. op cit.) 3. Frank (1972) mm, c. (1969) t SociEü Class 2nd the Comprehensive School'. 'Class Ine ualit• and Political Order % p. 6b. Paladin Booko. 5. HOGCARff, Richard. 'The Uses of Lit,eracv' London p. 298. 6. TAM•JBY, R.H. (1952). 'Equality' London. HOWES, Jaki (1973) 'Paper on how Architectural Students choose Architecture' S.A. C. 'Making of an Architect' Conference, York. 8. BERNSTEIN, Basil. (1271). in 'On Michael the classification Yound (ed. ) and framing of Educational Knowledge' . 9. BERNSTEIN, op cit.) Knovledze and Control. London. 36 PAPER FOR NAM EDUCATION GROUP FEETING CARDIFF THE RIBA COMMUNITY ARCHITECTURE .IORKING GROUP (CMG) AND AEHITECTURAL ED(EATION. The paper is intended to outline the position of CMG in relation to radical architectural practice, and thereby to assess its relevance to a radical architectural education. 1. Background The Cc»n.nunity Architectuædorking Group vas set up in 1976 as a sub committee of the RIBA Membership abd Public Affairs Cananittee (which is not itself involved in educational policy). Its initial brief was to investigate the relationship between the profession and the public at large, which was soon narrowed down to the study of Ccxnmunity architecture reinforced by the interests in this field Of Charles McKean (Secretary to the group) and the Co—option of Rod Hackney as Chairman. 2. CMG sees its role as "encouraging architects to serve the entire coaununity, and attempting to match skills and respurces of the profession with the need wherever it arises". TES analysis of this mis—taatch of skills and resources is that due to "major changes in social patterns (unspecified) there hag been an emergence of a "new client an i dividual or group usually with very small financial resources From this analysis CAWG sees its work as discovering and implementing the profeesional changes necessary for architects to vork with the "new client", including educational changes • 3. CAJG does not place coauaunity architecture within its social and econanic framework, a d thereby does not acknowledge the political content of the work. It further ignores the questions of the failure of conventional practice to satisfy the user, the conflicts of working with both and 'user—client' and the possible effects of professional intervention into community action. This approach has several consequences. Proffess ional ly a) CA"'G invites the profession as a whole to consider caanunity architecture as merely a specialism within the range of professional activity, allowing it to exist within the context of RIBA profess i onal ism b) By legitimising con,nunity architecture it reduces its potential as a 'user—interest' alternative to 'capitol—interest' architectural pract ice. c) By pavifig the way for (capital—interest' architectural practices to involve themselves in community architecture (through making suitable professional/code changes) it offers architecture as a possible form of control of users in the interest of the 'cap— ital—client % or as a method of keeping staff occupied that might otherwise be idle, or as a source of increased revenue by exploita— tion of the user—clieht. d) By placing community architecture wholly within the context of practice it ignores the need for public accountability for public funds. 37 NOTES 38 5. Educationally All CMG minutes and documents are available Charles I.EKean a) It does not acknowledge the need for a theoretical back— ground for ccxnunity architecture or the educationalists role in developing this. b) It concentrates almost exclusively on live projects,1. Fran the introduction to CMG's paper to RIBA council - April 1978 ignoring the associated theoretical sociology teaching etc.,of design, communication, econoanics, urban 2. From a circular to "Thirty odd individuals and practices", the alternative educational structures c) It sees no need to develop replies from which CMG based much of its later work - 9.9.77 in response to the requirements of community architecture. 6. CAWG sees its role educat ionaliy an increasing the acceptability3. RIBA is boncerned only with the effectiveness of the of live projects to schools, examiners and visiting boards. ItArchitectural Service" (From 1 above). CAWG refers to radical does not seek to make coaununity architecture an educationalpractitioners as attempting political indoctrination of their clients. requirement or to force changes upon schools or students. 7. Related to (4a) and (5c) above, by acknowledging the full Refer to the papers from the Cheltenham meeting, 10th Dec, especially anent required and by issuing guidelines on how to incgrporatethe paper by Chris Cripps, for an enlargement upon these. live projects into an otherwise unaltered curriculum promotes the idea of cmnunity architecture as 'just another part of the course •5, CMG's educational paper "Value of Ccxnmunity architecture in architectural education" 29th Aarch 78, and subsequent meeting on 8. CMG's educational Involvement could have the positive of the effect educationalof31st May 78 points towards this approach. introducing a more permissive attitude on behalf establishment towards cmununity—orientated teaching. However, its lack of coherent argument or analysis may reinforce the belief (widely held amongst educators and practitioners) that coaununity architecture is merely a fashion with no long—term educational value. 9. In conclusion, all CANG's policies and proposals should be viewed in the context of the likelihood of their being adopted as policy by the RIBA. CAWG's proposals will only be acceptable to the RIBA providing they do not go against the interests of the members of its controlling canmittees and council. Therefore any radical action is out of the question. CAWG itself has no power except to suggest changes, and it has only a snail lobby' on Council or ccmnittees. The Education and Practice Executive Ccx,unittee of the RIBA has built up its educational pc I icy on the foundations of the 1958 Oxford Conference, and as many of CAWG t s proposals will run against that philosophy, it will be limited to affecting changes of attitude rather than policy. 39 'Lessons from local practice' , drawn from workinq for ASSIST Phil McCafferty July 1978 This short paper is based on a personal awareness of educational inadequacies while working with ASSIST. I and most fellow ASSIST vorkers were the products of a pseudo—scientific approach to architecture which appeared in the late '60's and was paraded at Strathclyde University, (a former 'Tech' ) • I have interpreted 'educational in two senses. Firstly, the wider context of awareness of need for change in fellow architectural people and secondly, in greater detail, the lessons which have immediate importance within our educational system. First, the general message: i) We must all understand the various means of causing change, which is the natural result of architectural effort. An end product must be our aim and we should not merely define our role as one of designer or originator. We should not omit further involvernent, inclulding realisation, since are able to represent the user during approval or implernentation procedures followed by, say, a local authority or fund—granting body. We must offer a wider, but also sound, service. The way in which we work matters as much as the end product. An awareness of the various means of involvernent of the actual user must be one of our aims. This should rernove us from our norrnal role of ' then' and 'us' We must work in a manner of most benefit to the real client. iii ) It is useful and satisfying to offer one's services to solve a particular problem which might affect a group of people. This involves corrmitnent to a community and deep local involvement, perhaps* funded by local fee— earning projects. This may involve having a local base, providing wider services (planning, social advice, legal .aid and liaison with the departnents of the local authority), and forming definite views of the various local groups encountered (local poli tics) . Now for the detailed lessons which can be drawn from the above: a ) to educate staff and students about the real problems encountered in attempting to realise these ideas. There is a bureaucracy and strict role definition within most parties who deal %dth resources. Our education should include examples of both how constraining this can be and how it can be broken dov.rn by, say, personal contact. We must also encourage students to understand others' roles if we cannot become involved directly. 40 b) to make it obvious to students that architectural employrnent can take many very different forms — from the 'corner shop' practice to the multi— national multi—discipline set up. Discussion about the merits of each should be encouraged, along with forming of the individual 's approach to wrking methods. c) to understand the importance of user involvanent in all stages and how to select a representative user group within large organisations. The student must also learn how to communicate with the public at various levels. Too often we present wrk only to other professionals — tutors, examiners, corporate clients, etc. Students must use and assess many methods of communication — models, slides, video. d) to avoid the creation of 'professional' barriers, which can result from being trained to carry out specialised tasks. Architecture as a status' boost should be discouraged, along with attempts at assuming superiority to clients. Our advice must be regarded as equal to more usual across the counter' services. e) to promote architecture as an extension of ideologies, not merely as a guarantee of a salary. NAM Contact Hugo c/o Support 27 London Ian Cooper c/o The 28 Park Cardiff f) to fom links with the public by offering assistance from educational establishments. This wuld use the public money supporting education to provide a service of real local use. An ideas project office, perhaps including other disciplines; could act as a contact point. Human involvernent on all sides and 'real world' appreciation of other people's problans might rebalance the scientific influence which still exists. All this assumes that NAM wishes to modify the exi sting systern. However , you may wish to start from scratch: 43 Education Group addresses : Hinsley Clerkenwell Close ECI Welsh School of Architecture Place