Tomorrow's Architects: ARB consultation on education and training reforms

The role of the architect under this and parallel regulation (Building Safety Act) is being consolidated as a fall guy for the wider failings in construction and procurement. A huge percentage of publicly funded construction contracts involve the design role being undertaken by an unregulated contractor, with the construction contract administered by an unregulated agent of one background or another. This approach has been followed by private sector funders (banks) who require all technical design and construction to be undertaken in the same way. The architect produces drawings and specifications, but there is no requirement that these be followed, and no system to check if they have been. It is not at all clear what the point of enhanced regulation of a profession that is increasingly sidelined in that which should be its core role.

There is only one way to learn - and it takes time. Buildings take a long time to go from inception to completion.

The concept of design (architecture is an art) is downplayed. Notwithstanding this, my response to Q13 remains valid for this question.

See my response to Q13. Exactly what is ARB requiring of an architect, and indeed does the architect have that role in the real world?

I do not believe that ARB has the insight into architectural education that it needs. Its purpose is to regulate the profession, not educate it. The board has a minority of Architect members, and the organisation does not have the ability or expertise needed to contribute to education of what is a vocational and artistic discipline. Indeed the whole drift of the consultation reeks of management speak and cliche, that does not understand the practice of architecture, and is likely to increase the burdens on the profession - to the benefit of no-one.

I have no idea why ARB is doing this in the first place.

Adopt a reflective approach on why ARB is doing this in the first place; what it as an organisation brings to the table; and what good it will actually do.

Given the lack of representation of the profession at Board level, and the lack of in-house resources ARB has, there are two potential risks…
a. ARB needs to hugely increase it's registration fees to upgrade its resources, or
b. The whole process goes into delay, causing no end of confusion.

Respond to a. and b. above.

And what good is tight regulation of title going to do, if just the use of a nine letter word is being regulated.