Why does Studio take so much time? Is it really necessary?

College Majors Architecture Major
1

<p>No matter what school we visited, it was a common tour guide "joke" pointing to the architecture building, that the lights were always on. It is not a joke, and is obviously based on reality. Studio courses drain your time.</p>

<p>I'm trying to determine why this is necessary. I lived it (I'm an architect). My daughter is now living it, as an architecture student, and I'm angry. It seems far worse for her than it ever was for me. Plus, I have never worked those crazy hours as a professional, except for occasional overtime due to an upcoming deadline.</p>

<p>In past posts, I often defended the time spent in studio, justifying it as an art, and like any artist, you can become immersed in your work. I recognized that studio time can often be wasted, because it isn't all work and no play. It was almost a type of "cult", or at least family that developed in studio. Not all bad.</p>

<p>But now, it is almost as if it has taken on a life of its own, and is expected as a rite of passage, that has become worse over the years. To see new students expected to work non-stop on projects angers me. I know what it takes, and what they are asking of these students today is far more than I ever expected. It was a gradual thing when I went to school. I don't remember anyone "pulling all-nighters" the first year. I don't remember the work load being so crazy that you couldn't join any other extra-curricular activities. Maybe I just don't remember? ;-) I listen to students in other fields, and read posts about activities they explore, and outside lectures or events they attend. My daughter continuously sounds exhausted, and claims she has no time to explore other interests, due to non-stop studio work. And it is relentless. </p>

<p>A department head once said that the teachers don't expect it, but that the students generally push themselves, because they are a competitive bunch to begin with. I don't think that description fits my daughter. She was actually quite good with her time management skills, so I have to believe the work load is somewhat excessive. </p>

<p>I firmly believe as Cheers stated numerous times, that the work can be done in an 8 hour day. In fact, I think architecture education does the students a disservice to expect non-stop studio time. Good architects are well-rounded, and learn from integrating many fields and interests. </p>

<p>Is it necessary? Or is it a "rite of passage" that is expected because the professors once did it, so now it is the students' turn? </p>

<p>I have the same question of the crazy medical internship schedules, but that is another thread.</p>

2

<p>My D chose a BA path as she is cognizant of what a BArch or MArch hours entrail and not being much able to do much more than architecture stuff while in college. Trust me, she works her tail off at her college and has had some studio and art classes that have required umpteen hours but she is not in a professional degree program. So, she is on a sport team, an advisor, a leader for her major, a tour guide, and has occasional moments off too. She has experienced what an arch intensive is like (she did it in a summer program) and says she is glad to wait for professional school to live night and day in the studio as she did not want that as an undergrad, though she also works really hard as an undergrad....I'm not talking a party person or anything like that. Her sport alone is very very heavy committment. </p>

<p>I DO, however, have a child in a professional degree program as an undergrad in a different field. Her schedule involves school ALL day (not like BA programs) and required times all night and most of the weekend (even Saturday nights!). She has commitments basically from early AM until 11:30 PM daily and then has all the preparation for nine classes and so forth still to do. Her schedule is insane but she loves it. She wanted this and her passion runs deep and so she enjoys that almost every waking hour (which is most of her hours, LOL) is spent on doing what she loves. It is not for everyone. And it is not like going to normal college where you have a few hours of class each day and the rest of the time you figure in other obligations. The obligations are life consuming day and night in her program, and on weekends. Yes, it seems crazy. </p>

<p>So, I think those that are making the BA vs. BArch decision need to think long and hard as to which college experience they prefer. One of my kids wanted the professional schooling for college and loves it and the other wanted a BA and then follow it with professional school. I think those looking into undergraduate professional degree programs need to really talk to current students to get a handle of what their lives are like. I counsel students going into my other D's field and I talk a lot of what the schedule will be like if they enter the professional degree path as an undergrad. It is nothing like going for a BA in terms of the time committments to class/studio time. Both of my kids have intense schedules and do an unbelievable amount of things but my BA kid had more choices with how she structured her very full life and my BFA kid is committed to set things all day and night by virture of being in professional degree program.</p>

3

<p>i attend a b.arch program at a school where students tend to work very hard. no one in arch school ever requires you to pull an all nighter but all of us tend to want to do well so we put a ton of effort into our work. i think the harder part is trying to fit all of the other outside work with studio. most of us take 18-20 credits (in order to be on track for graduation, you have to take 18 credits min per semester) so we do have a couple of elective courses and to top that with studio and outside activities, it becomes quite intense. </p>

<p>currently I am taking a studio that is very computer intensive and I feel that since computers are far more effficient, you produce far more work in less amount of time. partly why I think studio is so time intensive is because it takes so long to build a model, draw etc...which is why I am sleeping more this year as opposed to last year, where studio was very drawing and model making focused.</p>

4

<p>The fact is, I could waltz into that studio, solve the design problem in fifteen minutes and produce a passable presentation in 4 to 8 hours, probably 4. For an accomplished architect, that would be no problem whatsoever. How long should it take a beginner? No more than 5 times longer?</p>

<p>Could it be that your D's approach is too stretched to compete in the program? I can almost guarantee that she is putting in too much time.</p>

<p>I say that as I (continually) ponder the weird status of female architects. We occupy 50% of the slots in schools--more in MArchI programs--and have done since the mid-70s. Yet, fewer than 14% of us bother to register. We're dropping out in droves. There are very few of us at the helm of firms doing large scale work. Few of us are widely recognized as notable designers--in or out of school. Why?</p>

<p>Here are some of my thoughts.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Society places too much emphasis and reward on Perfect work from primary and secondary female students. Boys are allowed to be sloppy idiots right through high school and they take full advantage of that opportunity. Deflecting teacher accolades, boys learn to be incredibly efficient. They are happy to bat .375.</p></li>
<li><p>Society places too much emphasis and reward on girls' acquiescent behavior. Girls need to know when to internally flip off a professor's remarks or demands--and many don't.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I would bet you beans to dollars that the majority of the boys are not working as hard. They may be in the studio but they are not working. They are socializing. That was my experience of all-nighters. Huge time-wasting accumulated until the metal hit the pavement and boys started pulling work out of their hats. (Or ****** haha).</p>

<p>Girls tend to compete by perfecting their work. Then, they run out of hours. They are crushed when a student with a fascile talent lays down a better project in half the time. I've recently had this conversation with female surgeon friends. Their male cohorts routinely complete surgeries in half the time with half the stress. </p>

<p>My suggestion for your D is that she not worry about getting a C grade in first year. Aim to bat .375--not 1000. Focus on speed and 'presentation' competancy--not quality and not brilliance. Careers are not made in first year studio. First year work won't go into the professional portfolio. I've never been blown away by a first year project, mine included (although one of mine did get published in my hometown newspaper as part of a university PR spin). Anyway, she won't get to 'brilliance' from a state of exhaustion. She needs time to reflect and absorb.</p>

<p>Tell her to adjust her priorities. Efficiency is critical to success--FAR more critical than perfection. Tell her to take time to sit in on Year 3 and 4 critiques. Get a glimpse of successful presentation techniques in the upper years. Take time to make friends with the top students in those years. If she's lucky, one of the top students is female.</p>

<p>She should keep in mind that when professors crack the whip, they are probably trying to motivate those procrastinating boys.</p>

5

<p>cheers: Brilliantly said, and may I say this is true for almost all fields, not just architecture.</p>

6

<p>soozie..the downside of the less intense 2 year MArch I is that those students MUST use their first year work in their portfolios. They have so few semesters of design studio, they cannot afford to produce anything but brilliant work from the get-go. Brilliance from the get-go is too big an ask for the majority of MArchiI students. As a result, their portfolios are often much less sophisticated.</p>

<p>Learning to design architecture in only four architecture school studios is a steep ramp to climb. Very very few MArchIs finish with the same 'design' skills as a BArch grad. Students need many semesters to develop their design confidence--and time management. Ks daughter has nine more semesters to get there. An MArchI student would have only 3 more semesters to adjust to, and match, the competition.</p>

<p>I look forward to your posts as your D makes that journey through grad school and into the profession.</p>

7

<p>Back on the original post-</p>

<p>I know that the way my studio is set up( at Cooper Union) is that much of the work we produce is entirely redone constantly and that it is almost a guessing game at times as to what a professor might or might not like. Our Studio Class has three different professors so it is difficult to satisfy everything they expect out of drawing right from the start. A lot of the time spent in the studio is imaginative as well, and when I say that I mean conversing about projects happens constantly. Studio does take up time, a lot of time, however you should still be able to explore other things as well- if you can't you may be working on the wrong things/ working in the wrong way/ or not keeping a good balance of time.</p>

8

<p>Cheers, I know your preference for BArch programs. </p>

<p>I also know that several of the MArch programs my D is applying to take 3 or 3 1/2 years and so that is 6 or 7 semesters of studio and she, and other undergrads who may enter such programs, have had prior arch experience....nothing like a BArch degree program, but indeed they have done arch work....enough to produce a portfolio to get into Arch grad school. (ie., my own kid has had to work on arch design projects prior to attending a MArch program) . Many of those who take this path become successful and gain meaningful employment as architects. </p>

<p>Each path has its pros and cons. Each path fits each person's needs and interests in different ways an for different reasons.</p>

9

<p>I also don't see the time spent in studios being that much different between a Barch and BA or BS in Arch design plus a March. My D will have 2 architecture studios in drawing so that she can develop a portfolio to apply for a transfer into the School of Architecture at the end of sophomore year. Then in her last 2 years, she will have a studio each semester, plenty of time to develop a portfolio for applying for her March. Add on 4 to 6 more studios during the March and it sounds pretty close to the number taken with a Barch. </p>

<p>Different ways to the same place.</p>

10

<p>the biggest difference between the b.arch and something arch related is that the b.arch has a lot of architecture requirements. so besides studio, you also have structures, theory, building tech, history, etc. with all of that, it begins to take a toll</p>

11

<p>KJOFKW, I think the studio experience varies by school and by degree, but I am not sure it has really changed that much over the years. In my undergraduate program we started sophmore studios with 195 kids and by the end of the year we were down to 95. A project handed out every Monday, due every Friday, an all nighter every Thursday night for a year. Study all weekend to catch up. I loved it, it was so much better than engineering.</p>

<p>There were some outstanding students in that class; a female design partner at KPF, the head of design for Perkins and Will in NY, the head of design for HOK in Atlanta, and the most talented member of the class (a woman) who was teaching and died in a plane crash. They all put in the same amount of hours. There were a few folks who managed to spend a little less time, but it showed in the work and they really missed out on a great deal of the studio experience. </p>

<p>By graduate school at Columbia I had worked for a few years and I was in studio by 9:00 every morning, spent every spare hour between classes working on my project, left the studio at 11:00 and only pulled an all-nighter on the night before the project was due (twice a semester). Could I have done the same in undergrad? Perhaps, but I don't think I had the maturity and focus.</p>

<p>I know this sounds harsh, but I think that if a student does not enjoy the studio experience and is not passionate about spending time there, then I think they should consider another major that does make them passionate.</p>

<p>rick</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
I know this sounds harsh, but I think that if a student does not enjoy the studio experience and is not passionate about spending time there, then I think they should consider another major that does make them passionate.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I really agree with that statement. I have a kid in a professional degree program in another field as an undergrad and it is all consuming at all hours of the day/night and weekends as well. But it is her passion and life's work and so the hours are not a complaint as she wants to be doing these things really badly even though her hours are way longer than for a regular type college student and even involve commitments on weekend nights. It really is not "work" but is just part of who she is. She can't imagine doing anything else.</p>

<p>That is one reason my other D did not enter a BArch program (not the only reason but is one of them) because at 17, she wasn't entirely sure of the architecture path as she hadn't truly studied it yet in high school and knew it was a huge commitment and wanted to first be sure. Now as an undergrad, she is sure and is ready to have it be all consuming in graduate school. She explored the field enough to know she wanted to be dedicated to this. First, she had to do that though. My other kid got to do that at a younger age as her field is one she had been immersed in her entire life. But with architecture, my other kid had explored it some but hadn't had a chance to be fully immersed in the field in high school to make that kind of commitment that a BArch would entail. She is very happy with her path (BA Arch Studies) and has sampled what a professional degree program would be like as she did Harvard's summer program and has done an arch program abroad. </p>

<p>I agree with Rick that to put these kinds of hours into an intensive program in one field, one must be very passionate about it. I can't see doing it otherwise. Seeing my other D in her professional degree program, I see that a person has to love it and be willing to be consumed by it or just would not want to put up with that kind of schedule.</p>

13

<p>I know there are many pros and cons of the varied architecture education approaches -- 5 year, 4+2, 4+3, etc. I'm more curious as to WHY studio demands so much time, and am asking if in the long term that is a wise approach to their education. One could argue that it is new material. But that is true in any field. Hopefully, that's what college is all about -- learning new material. I thought my daughter was just complaining about the work load at first, but when I saw first hand, the extent of their last assignment, I was shocked. While the assignment was reasonable, the complexity and the time frame they were given to complete it, was not. It included building a complex model which I could not complete it in the time frame given, even with MANY years experience and training. They have only been in school for 4 weeks! Evidently, it has been like this non-stop from the beginning, but I was not aware of the severity until I saw it first hand. No wonder the lights are always on. More importantly, is it really necessary?</p>

<p>We did ask about the "weed-out" process at her school, and based on discussions and numbers felt it was not as big an issue as at other schools. Wow Rick, that was some drop out rate! That's one way to limit the number of people going into the field -- and keeping the supply/demand ratio tilted on the architect side ;-) </p>

<p>I agree w/ SoozieVT that it is tough for (most) 18 yr. olds to know what there passion is at this point! I also agree with Rick, that that you must love what you are doing and be 100% committed to it, to put up with that type of environment. And, if the passion is not there, better to discover early rather than late. However, I also think that's an excuse for abuse sometimes. (thinking of firms who do not pay young interns, or developers who expect architects to complete work for unfair fees -- and professionals who do so because they are desperate, or non-paid competitions, unpaid research assistants, etc.). </p>

<p>A side effect of this type of training is that architecture students only know other architecture students. They spend all their free time in studio using multiple disciplines, but rarely reaching out beyond their own world. It then takes many years of exposure in the business world to become comfortable and effective with other disciplines. Perhaps this training contributes to why they are often seen as the lone rangers in the built environment?</p>

14

<p>kjofkw....from my observations, the projects are very time consuming. My D says so. A lot of hands on work is just that way. </p>

<p>There are drawbacks, like you indicate if in this kind of intensive specialized program as an undergraduate. Your child is mostly focused on one subject and is spending most of the time on that field and with those in it and not other subjects, other people or other activities. My D did not want that for undergrad. It really is a contrast to a BA program. My D did not want to give up learning about other things (even though she is majoring and spending a chunk of time in this field) and didn't want to give up the experience with others outside her field, nor participating in ECs which are very important in her life. It just is a very different kind of college program and experience and that is why the decision at age 17 has to take into account what sort of college academic and overall experience the student wants to have and if they want to be narrowly focused on one thing and committ to just one thing or not. My kid is ready to do that in grad school but did not want make that decision at age 17, nor have that as her undergrad experience. She knows what it entails (as you are describing) and is happy and excited to do that in grad school but not as her undergrad academic or total experience. </p>

<p>I think the projects are very time consuming. She has taken such courses and knows that if every course were that type of project and time, that is all she'd ever be doing. That's great if that's what you want to do. She does, but not in undergrad. It is not like she isn't as busy. Her schedule is mind boggling to me and all the commitments she has, but she has more choices and more varied experiences. She also has the hands on projects but not everything she does is of that nature. When my D was home for five days this summer, I watched first hand as she built a design project and how time consuming it was. It is the nature of that kind of work. If all your courses are of that sort, that is mostly what you will be doing full time and not much else. My D likes to learn about other things too and she also is very dedicated to her EC endeavors and will give those up for grad school but not for undergrad. Her friends in undergrad are studying all sorts of fields. Others, like even my other child, are ready and willing to be doing one main thing that they live and breathe 24/7 and are often with others doing the same.</p>

<p>For my kid who is in an undergrad professional degree program, I see some who just don't realize until they do it that the intensity required is not for them. I advise students going into her field for college and try to give them an inkling to the kind of schedule and intensity as it is NOT for everyone. I know in the kind of program she is doing, that those in many programs like it at many colleges around the country, do leave, as they didn't know what they were getting into. These sort of high intensity and time heavy professional degree programs are not the right path for all. Some don't truly understand that until they experience it. It is not the regular college experience at all. And it involves a commitment before they enter the college program, and so they aren't really exploring options once they get there as a BA student can do. They are already committed not only to the field but to the intense time heavy professional degree program which is all consuming. It's great for those who want it (like my younger D does) and who know what it entails and want to do it 24/7.</p>

15

<p>"the biggest difference between the b.arch and something arch related is that the b.arch has a lot of architecture requirements. so besides studio, you also have structures, theory, building tech, history, etc."</p>

<p>My D's BS in Arch has the same reqirements. Again, just 2 different roads to the same place depending on when a person feels ready to commit to the journey.</p>

16

<p>Apologies if I was unclear. A BSArch/MArch offers 9.5 to 10 semesters of design. That is more than enough design studio to develop design talent. Gehry has a BSArch from USC.</p>

<p>Abusive k? More than my current client (one of the best of my career), the one who wants me to produce complete construction documents for a huge tower in 4 months instead of 6? Nah--it's just business. No need to lose my sense of humour. It's my job to sort out the staff and <em>hours</em> to accomplish it--if I agree to that request. Can we pull off the high design in that amount of time? 25+ years out of school and that is still a central question in my life as a lead designer.</p>

<p>Necessary? What's necessary (my opinion only) is five to six years of 16 hours of daytime studio time along with 40 to 50 hours of additional studio time per week. 100 hours of studio time per week is not necessary or even hlepful in freshman year--even though that is the constant message drummed into student's heads by school culture. I didn't drink that koolaid but I did make sure I was an integral part of the studio community in my year group--and two of the year groups ahead of me. It's doable. No one ever questioned my intensity or passion. If anything, I was regarded as too intense. (Can you imagine??).</p>

<p>Efficiency in life and design. Priorities in life and design. Spatial sight. Those are the skills to learn in freshman year. Get a passing grade in those three skills and bingo. You're on your way.</p>

<p>What are the priorities for the professors? Developing a student's design ability is what makes them tick. What do most profs want to see from freshman designers?</p>

<p>I've only been a guest critic, but having seen hundreds of competently produced, but dull as toast portfolio projects, my guess, in order, would be: </p>

<ol>
<li> Daring (A step above confidence. Assumes confidence).<br></li>
<li> Facility (speech/2D/3D).</li>
<li> Stamina (mental and physical)</li>
</ol>

17

<p>Postscript:</p>

<p>When students hit the wall, it's usually because they lack easy speech and easy drawing ability. It's hard to manage time if a student is desperately trying to compensate for those two abilities.</p>

<p>When architects hit the wall, it's because the passion fizzled or the opportunities fizzled.</p>

18

<p>k, I understand your concern. My D was prepared for the full studio experience, but got accepted to her reach school (Stanford) which does not have architecture. So now she has started in the product design program there and will have a much better rounded undergrad experience than I had. If she decides she still wants to be an architect then her challenge will be to cram all that studio intensity into a 3.5 year MArch program. There is just a lot to learn.</p>

<p>rick</p>

19

<p>Thank you! kjofkw. I'm up right now working on a model. I needed a break and alas you posted just the right thread. I'm glad someone in the profession understands. I have black rings developing around my eyes due to lack of sleep. Some nights I get only 4 hours of sleep and then I'm at school the next day for 10 hours. I'm in the M.Arch program at KU. I hope all the hard work will pay off. From what I've heard, an Architects salary doesn't do his/her education justice. What I mean by that is we have as much schooling as doctors, yet are paid a fraction of what they make. It's now fair. I guess it's a labor of love. I couldn't see myself doing anything else. </p>

<p>Thanks for the sympathy.</p>

20

<p>^ brothel.</p>

<p>i feel you. I understand what you are going through. I am at that phase right now - for passion or for greed? and i still don't know. Luckily, I'm in a undergrad B.A program which is more "loose" in B.arch programs. I love doing architecture and I agree, the amount of time put forth to our projects is more gruesome, if not the same as studying for organic chemistry,etc, but we get paid less when we come out. kinda sucks doesn't it? and the majority from what Ive seen is that we don't get paid 6 digits until were old. Man, decisions decisions. </p>

<p>but hey,look at it this way..one reward that we have is</p>

<p>buildings last longer than human beings.</p>