In early America, an architect’s education consisted of personal instruction, observation and participation as key learning tools in the Master Builder (Mentor)—Apprentice Relationship. Working with the master, information was not guarded, but shared generously. The process took today’s time equivalent of earning a college education up to a master’s degree. At the end of this journey, the apprentice had gained the knowledge of the mentor, and would one day continue the cycle.

Karen Elisabeth Lesney, Associate AIA

I By the 1850s, an academic route was replacing the mentoring system. With the emergence of the professional educational system in United States universities following the Civil War [1], formal architectural degrees replaced the long established practice of apprenticeships. The first Department of Architecture was founded at MIT in 1865, and soon other universities were starting their own programs. The new curriculum of the emerging American architecture schools imitated the renowned classical-style of the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris. Atelier/studio experience similar to the old mentor/apprentice system was often sought by students, but the passing of knowledge was based more on examination than experience. The rigorous advancement of the Ecole method quickly persuaded Americans to pursue the prestige of having the Beaux Arts Degree.

By the early 20th century, the American university system caught up with the curriculum of the Ecole, bringing the architectural rites of passage home. Modern industry and technologies began to reveal new innovations, yet, up to the Second World War, American universities were still churning out students trained under the antiquated Ecole system of learning. Experience was the only means to learning the various roles of being an architect, and information gained from a mentor’s knowledge was rare. The architect asked himself why he would impart the knowledge so painfully earned to someone who had not experienced the same struggle? It was every man for himself on the turbulent seas of architectural practice.

The influx of Europeans to the United States following the WWII initiated a new architectural movement toward modernity in education. A chasm began to appear between standard architectural practice and the methods by which students were now being prepared with emerging technologies. Computers began to advance drawing, but alienated the intern from routine hand-drawing commonly experienced a century earlier. And once again, for the architect with degree in hand, the real education began as the intern entered the workplace. By the end of the 20th century, graduating students were ill prepared to interact with the multiplicity of roles within architectural firms.

The education of the last hundred years has essentially become obsolete. Knowledge is information gained by exchange. The architectural establishment that once accepted the academic voice of the old school was deafening in their call for change. Interns began to question the inefficient means by which their education had prepared them to participate in the profession.

Today, we see the architectural educational system at a crossroads, realizing the wide disparity of students graduating without the proper tools to function as they enter the workforce. There is something inherently wrong with the educational system, if firms have to undo the deficiencies of the schools [2]. If the role of the mentor had remained a crucial part of the educational process, the frustration experienced by architectural students today would not be an issue.

This moment in time is crucial in bringing back the role of a mentor to the workplace. How do we rethink the decades of conditioned behavior against sharing one’s knowledge and expertise to a stranger [3]. It stands to reason that everyone within a firm is on the same team, yet information-sharing is rare under the current system, creating enormous stumbling blocks. Full disclosure and involvement would ensure that architects and their interns are always on the same page.

Why, then, in a profession of creativity, do architects perpetuate a sense of an informational stasis within the Knowledge is power, and architects tend to guard knowledge attained during their struggle up the professional ladder, even with their own employees. The tendency to be guarded undermines the principal of involvement, and involvement requires sharing. Sharing requires trust and time. And time is money. This may be the key reason many architects simply plug their new recruits directly into a computer station and continue with their business.

Interns need guidance to complete their journey toward becoming an architect. Remember the key learning tools of the Master Builder/Apprentice, and take the time to work with your intern. It will be time well spent for both of you.

1. A Brief History of Architectural Education. Garry Stevens

2. The Mentoring Mystique: Tapping Its Hidden Potential. Kerry Harding, 2003

3. Mentoring. Columns. Melinda Koester Poss AIA, June 2002.