Architects but Without Experience

As I am a student in AASTMT, I learned that design is a decision. The architect should decide What he want to do in his project to reach his main target from the building. So from this I am Not agree with design education system in AASTMT because students in our facility far from Practical life. They learned how to take their design decisions but in imagined projects on the Paper do not relate any more to the real field. If we put the projects of the AASTMT students In the real field we will find that a lot of decisions in their designs should be changed because It is not be able to serve the field. So the main argument of this essay that design education In AASTMT should be evaluated. It should depend on practical training in workshops and in the Field, learn students how to think in the economic side and learn them how to treat with the Materials through practical trainings. With this method I think that the quality of graduated Students from AASTMT will be improved, because they will graduated qualified to treat with

The field and to take a very effective decisions in their designs able to serve the community. Not just teach architect students with imagined projects on a papers do not relate any more to The fact. I will support my argument with talking about architecture schools depended on Practical training in it is education method and how it relate the design to the labor market Number two talking about how the field is the main factor that effected on design decisions Of many architects not just apply what they learned in their architecture schools Let us start to talk about first point in the argument. This point talk about architecture schools Depended on practical training in it is education system. 

Bauhaus is one of this schools that it is Main target to make architects have the ability to take a decisions in their designs from learning Materials, construction methods and learn everything about labor market or economic. All of This things related to the real field. In the period of industrial revolution the main target of Bauhaus to achieve the modern needs for the labor market like industries, train stations and Solve the problem of population density (Akin 1983). First we will talk about roots of this school and the education methods in it in details and show This school teach architect students to take their design decisions through concrete things Related to the real field, added to the labor market not just through imagined projects on the Papers. 

Bauhaus was perfect in teach craftsmanship and give them a chance to teach the designers in Workshops, that one of it is own targets to develop the products of designers and make it Contribute in external economy. Government at this time familiar that the quality of the design Not just depended on eye pleasure but depended on how the design is economic and the Modern designers should understand why the design is good and how it will constructed in an Economic way and the used materials (white ford 1992). From this we saw how people and Government evaluate the design on basics related to the real field like design efficiency and How it effect on the economic not evaluate the design on it is aesthetic.

 At this point I will talk in details about how the students in Bauhaus learn to be an architects And what is the Bauhaus education system details to see how it depend on practical training As a major thing in it is system. Bauhaus education process divided to three levels preliminary Courses, general courses and the last level is architecture training. The first level (preliminary) Consist of three semester and students in this level learn some basics like how to draw Architecture drawing, how to treat with tools, learning the materials and there were a practical Part. Students visit a lot of sites, industries, train how to treat with materials and how to relate Their design decisions with industry through training in workshops (Frampton 1992). If we compare between first three semesters in Bauhaus and in AASTMT we will find that Students in Bauhaus have a good experience about practical life. 

They began to be qualified to Take effective design decisions in the real life counter to students in AASTMT they finished their First three semesters without knowing anything about practical life. As for second level in Bauhaus it is a general courses. In this level students complete training in Workshops on how to use materials, how to create architecture forms and how design spaces. We will find that in this level practical training is a major part of this level. As for third level and It is last one students began to be qualified to work in practical life through extensive studies About every material separately. 

They trained in carving workshops, metal workshops and wall Painting workshops and so on to be familiar with all materials and know how every material can Can be used in the design. This way helped architects to take a good effective decisions in their Designs. Another thing students at this level learn how to treat with economic in the market And study everything about prices. After finishing all this level students graduated from Bauhaus qualified to take very effective design decisions in the field. So if we compare design Education system in AASTMT with design education in Bauhaus we will find that in AASTMT System just depend on learn students just a basics without know them anything about practical Life so they graduated without any experience. But in Bauhaus the system depended on Practical training. That is the missed thing in design education system in AASTMT. The second thing that I will use to support my argument to talk about how architects effected With practical life and the field to show the importance of practical training that should Architect students have in AASTMT.

 For example Danial Burnham he began his work with the Architect Jenney William. He began to learn from him and he returned back to Chicago. In this Time there were two big events happened. The first one is the end of civil war and the second One was Chicago fire. Burnham began to think in ideas to serve clients in the market because There were a very big change in architecture style in Chicago was built towers. So Burnham Create a new design of foundations for towers by steeling it in a new way. This type of Foundations used in unstable soils. This design of foundations used In many towers in this Period. From this we found that the main factor that effected on Burnham design decision Came from the field and the Client needs in the market. Also in this period many architects began to change their design method and began to take a New decisions in their designs to keep up with the development that occurred in Chicago in this Period. 

They changed the structure system from using bearing walls to skeleton structure Because skeleton structure more effective in the towers and they designed it to be fireproof They changed the structure system because skeleton steel structure create availability to Change external walls with glass so it reduced using electricity in the building because they Depended on natural light more than artificial lights. All of this examples show how the field And practical life in the labor market very effective in design decisions. The last example proof That the practical life has the upper hand on design decisions that architect take. Louis Sullivan although he studied in école des beaux art in France that depended on detected Basics are distribution, disposition, composition and Marche. But when Sullivan finished his Study in beaux art he started his work but in office in Chicago.

 He designed a lot of projects in Chicago as a towers although what he learned in beaux art totally different from Chicago style So we found from this example that the practical was totally different from what we learned in Architecture schools and sometimes field oblige architects to take decisions different from What we learned. In my conclusion I think that design education in AASTMT should be developed. The design Education method should depend on practical training in the field more than learning students With imagined projects on the papers, to make students feeling with the context, materials and Economic.

 This way will make architect students think in their designs in a more effective way And take decisions in their designs able to serve people in the community. So I showed example Of architecture school depended on practical training and one of these targets to make Students earn experience when they still in the architecture school. And I showed many Examples tell us how the field or practical life very effective in design decision of the architects. So AASTMT should help students to have experience to graduate qualified to work in the Practical life and in the field.

References:

• www.buffaloah.com
• www.Britannica.com
• www.visual-arts-cork.com
• The new architecture and Bauhaus by (Walter Gropius)  

Cite this page