When it works as envisioned, the Intern Development Program is excellent. Of course, it doesn't always work. Anecdotal accounts from my former students suggest a considerable amount of incorrect reporting of designated work categories as interns struggle to complete their requirements in a timely manner and employers try to operate efficiently.
My own experience some twenty years ago, when my state had just adopted the IDP requirements, was extremely fruitful. I was trained in a firm that was deeply committed to mentoring, and the IDP check-list provided a framework for my requests to be exposed to different stages of projects and different departments in the firm. It also helped that I had initially arrived at this firm as part of a required year-long internship program coordinated by my university.
As Vitruvius had already noted two thousand years ago, the education of an architect is a complex process requiring a delicate balance of theory and practice. Our system is designed to take advantage of the strengths found in different environments. Universities are dedicated to education and research, while firms are more adept at training.
Over the last year, the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture (ACSA) engaged on a consultation process with its members to identify the most pressing issues in architectural education. The resulting Architectural Education Action Plan identified four priority areas of investigation:
First, the EXPLOSION OF KNOWLEDGE: We must map emerging areas of relevant knowledge and integrate them into our curricula.
Second, the EFFECTIVENESS OF STUDIO-BASED LEARNING: We must analyze and promote studio education with respect to its objectives, methods and outcomes.
Third, EXTENSION INTO LIFELONG LEARNING: We must take the leading role in continuing education.
And finally, the EXPANDING FUTURES OF STUDENTS: We must integrate substantial interdisciplinary learning into architectural education.
All of these issues are very relevant to architectural interns. But I want to emphasize here the expanding futures of our students because this issue is at the heart of some of the critical questions being raised at this conference. Those with an architectural education have always had the option to pursue a related career in the building industries, such as construction or real estate. Today the options have multiplied to include fields such as animation, web-site design, product design, geographic information systems, and event coordination.
It is clear that an architectural education does provide insights into all those activities. And it is my observation that architectural educators have become increasingly open to interdisciplinary speculation, at the same time that the proliferation of design-build programs in our schools have made students much more aware of career opportunities that vertically integrate the building process. Therefore, it should not be surprising that an increasing number of architecture graduates have chosen not to follow traditional career paths leading to licensing. And while this may not be the only dynamic at work in explaining declining licensing rates, anything that expands the choices facing architecture graduates should be welcome with open arms.