Likewise, the fact that these early studio models served primarily white male students should make us question the assumptions and power structures embedded within studio culture.
Proponents of the disciplinarity of architecture praise the virtues of “the canon”.
However, many schools of architecture across the country still do not educate students about this policy nor seem to follow it.
While there are certainly creative strengths and a generalized camaraderie fostered by traditional studio models, they do not adequately prepare students for navigating the global present.
In a posthumous 1990 essay “A Black Box: The Secret Profession of Architecture”, Reyner Banham warned of architecture’s corrosive trend toward insulating itself from discussions outside of the discipline.
Decades later, architecture finds itself in an even more dire state of affairs.
It also affects the health and wellness of students.
Over ten years ago, the AIAS (American Institute of Architecture Students) and NAAB (National Architectural Accrediting Board) created a new requirement for accreditation, requiring all schools to address these precise concerns through a written policy on studio and learning culture.
It is our hope these principles spur debate and much needed action for fundamentally transforming studio culture.
Agency Students are under tremendous social, economic, and cultural pressures in school.