my year out in the recession_part two

So, what do I find patronising about Ruth Reed's article, and the general response from the RIBA?
Starting with the title 'Year out: No placements, no worries'. Reed suggests that not completing the practical experience, as prescribed by the RIBA, is nothing to be concerned about. I appreciate that other forms of experience may well be a valid use of time and aid personal development, but are unlikely to help when competing against candidates with a year or more office experience post part II. Of more immediate concern to me is that some universities appear to be continuing to expect a full 12 months experience for admission to part II courses, at least for external applicants (this was gathered from my own enquiries earlier this year, I was quite happy to return to the same school, others may want the freedom to move schools). As well as the practical difficulties of not completing a placement, there is also the psychological effect of spending 3 years building up to starting work in the profession, only to find very few paid employment opportunities available.

Reed continues with examples of alternative work, including labouring on a building site, plastering and plumbing. For a start, if nobody is designing buildings, who is building them? The recession obviously isn't restricted to architects. She describes plastering and plumbing as life skills. If I'm not mistaken, plasterers and plumbers complete courses and have professional bodies of their own. Any DIY skills that architectural graduates may have are unlikely to qualify them for work in a commercial construction company. As much as it would make for more technically minded architects with an appreciation of the trades that actually build things, it's not going to happen en masse.

Similarly affected by the recession is the journalism suggestion (also an equally competitive field where unpaid interns are common), and engineering (also another field where architecture graduates may not be suitably qualified to compete).

Travel? Is travel free? Having emerged from university saddled with debt, spending more on travelling the world is hardly a realistic venture. It becomes increasingly apparent that Reed's suggestions are options for the privileged few who have the funds to do whatever they like, and would do so anyway without an obvious list of suggestions from the RIBA.

Reed's advice for the majority of students (87% according to the AJ's student survey), who need paid employment to survive, comprises of a single paragraph. This paragraph suggests that students will gain some amazing insight into the needs of end users of buildings by spending a year in a call centre, supermarket or fast food restaurant.

Initiatives like the Host Practice scheme are to be commended, but when they consist of a PDF document and a listing of 3 opportunities, it's hardly a solution for the thousands of graduates in need of work. I also don't see what differentiates this scheme from unpaid placements where students end up doing non fee paying work on competitions and proposals anyway.

RIBA, along with the support of practices, need to be providing flexible opportunities for students to find employment and afford to live.

Ruth Reed's advice simply reinforces the image of architecture as a profession for the affluent, a closed shop for anyone who can't afford to pay their way through 7 years of training for little financial reward at the end.

My suggestions
Financial help is needed to support students who are unemployed or on low wages. As registered students, technically unable to claim jobseekers allowance, funding needs to come from the government & universities. The amount of student loan/grant available to placement students could be increased to cover basic living costs. RIBA and its members should be lobbying for this. Schemes like Irena Bauman's pilot in Yorkshire should be encouraged and expanded.

Practices need to encourage flexible working patterns. It is not acceptable to expect students to work 10 hours or more a day for little or no remuneration. Job sharing and flexible hours that have become common in other industries need to be adopted within architecture.

Students need to up their game to get work that is available. Take all the CV advice you can get. Get a website. Show your best work. Use careers services. Having seen the quality and quantity of CVs that come into a practice, you really need to stand out to avoid going in the recycling bin after a brief glance.

Universities need to actively assist students in finding placements. Schools can provide workspace and resources for students to complete competition work and research. Universities could also fund teaching assistant posts, technical roles etc.

I think the most practical advice I can come up with is to take whatever paid employment is available, and around that fit in:

• voluntary work to add interest and broaden experience


• competition entries (including wider design and urban comps, photography, graphics etc)


• reading. Lots of it.


• travel. Not necessarily abroad. Keep up with new exhibtions & buildings. Visit interesting cities. The UK is full of them.
  

My worry is that before any real help is established on the ground it will be too late. That 'lost generation' described in the press WILL happen. Talented graduates will find other vocations and British architecture will be worse for it.