In the 1996 AIA （American Institute of Architecture） Convention in Minneapolis, the governing bodies in the education and professionalization of architects in the US （namely, the American Institute of Architecture,...In the 1996 AIA （American Institute of Architecture） Convention in Minneapolis, the governing bodies in the education and professionalization of architects in the US （namely, the American Institute of Architecture, American Institute of Architecture Students, National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, National Architecture Accrediting Board and the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture） released the Boyer Report, subsequently published as Building Community： A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice. The report was named in honor of Ernest Boyer, an educational theorist who also participated in writing the text. Less comprehensive than the canonical texts by Marcus Vitruvius Pollio and his interlocutors, it is nonetheless a mirror of our current assumptions about the education of the architect. This paper looks at the epistemology inherited from Vitruvius as it shapes pedagogy up and through the Boyer Report and into the 21 st century. Using a method of comparative analysis applied to past and current architecture programs, our argument is that historical divisions between professional or applied knowledge and liberal or theoretical knowledge inherited from the past limit our capacity within architecture education to integrate new strategies for knowledge creation and dissemination. It is concluded that any serious revision of architecture education means a systematic reconsideration of the basis of architecture knowledge. What of the （persistent） Vitruvian model is relevant in our post-modern condition？ What do we learn from the image of our profession projected through the lens of the Boyer Report and it is like？ In other words, what would Vitruvius do？展开更多
文摘In the 1996 AIA （American Institute of Architecture） Convention in Minneapolis, the governing bodies in the education and professionalization of architects in the US （namely, the American Institute of Architecture, American Institute of Architecture Students, National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, National Architecture Accrediting Board and the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture） released the Boyer Report, subsequently published as Building Community： A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice. The report was named in honor of Ernest Boyer, an educational theorist who also participated in writing the text. Less comprehensive than the canonical texts by Marcus Vitruvius Pollio and his interlocutors, it is nonetheless a mirror of our current assumptions about the education of the architect. This paper looks at the epistemology inherited from Vitruvius as it shapes pedagogy up and through the Boyer Report and into the 21 st century. Using a method of comparative analysis applied to past and current architecture programs, our argument is that historical divisions between professional or applied knowledge and liberal or theoretical knowledge inherited from the past limit our capacity within architecture education to integrate new strategies for knowledge creation and dissemination. It is concluded that any serious revision of architecture education means a systematic reconsideration of the basis of architecture knowledge. What of the （persistent） Vitruvian model is relevant in our post-modern condition？ What do we learn from the image of our profession projected through the lens of the Boyer Report and it is like？ In other words, what would Vitruvius do？
