Credits: 1 AIA LU/Elective; 1 AIBD P-CE; 0.1 ICC CEU; 0.1 IACET CEU
May qualify for learning hours through most Canadian architectural associations
Young architects and designers aspiring to an “avant-garde” career typically follow a particular path: a hybrid business model of teaching at a school of architecture while maintaining a small independent firm. The research and income from teaching enable practitioners to pursue work consisting of exhibitions, installations, and publications, but generally very few buildings. Because many up-and-comers do this, having a foot in academia and a foot in practice might seem like the norm, but does it depend on specific economic conditions? While this approach can lead to greater creative autonomy and name recognition, does it insulate against market uncertainties or create a double exposure to them? With the Architecture Billing Index in a prolonged decline, and with schools of architecture facing the “Demographic Cliff,” will this model of practice be viable for those entering the field now?
Join Architectural Record for a conversation with three leading firms as they examine the viability of the academic–practice hybrid model and consider what today’s economic and institutional pressures mean for the next generation of architects.
Learning Objectives:
- Discuss the reciprocity between academic research and professional practice.
- Clarify the relationship of institutional funding—both from universities and private grants—and creative practices.
- Recognize the tradeoffs of different pathways chosen in a design career.
- Evaluate the tension between producing symbolic value and economic pressures.
Sponsored by:
 |  |
 |  |