21 / 52
NTNU – THE FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE AND FINE ART
21
In this section detailed observations, evaluation and recommendations are presented under nine subtitles. Certain
themes will be intentionally repeated several times. The reason for this is to approach important issues from all the
relevant perspectives of the system.
7. ‘Results of the Evaluation’
– observations and recommendations
7.a. ‘Architect’
The role of the architect and architecture is changing; it has
changed before and has been widened, but also narrowed
down. At the moment the role of the architect is being
discussed in a wider context. NTNU’s slogan is ‘Knowledge
for a better future’. The students are now buying into this
and believe in it in a different way than before. The architec-
tural students are exploring how architecture can contribute
to social development in a different way now from only a
few years ago. This is because many of the conditions for
architecture are changing and opening up, allowing different
understandings.
But what are these changes? What kinds of architects are
needed? And what kind of roles can (or should) the architect
pursue or take?
STRENGTHS
• An aspiration or goal to educate architects for
the FUTURE
• There are discussions about what kind of architect is
needed in the future
• Not educating only aesthetically-oriented designers, but
those with values related to social responsibility and the
ambition to make a difference
• A sense of space and material (through hands-on,
1:1 approaches)
• The FUTURE is discussed (complexity,
the ‘big rethink’ etc)
OBSERVATION and EVALUATION
There is a will or a goal to educate architects for the future.
And there are discussions concerning the multitude of
roles one can take and the contributions one can make to
solve challenges. There is also a variety of courses one can
choose from in dealing with these issues in different ways.
Still the changing conditions and what and how the architect
can contribute seems unclearly defined. The discussions, for
example ‘the big rethink’, seem to include only a small core
of the faculty. To work out the new roles or assignments is
in process, but could the School make this clearer together
with the students, and discuss and communicate the options
that the students have? And who should be included in this
process? What kind of implications does this have for the
curriculum, and for institutional and staff development?
What are the roles and the changed conditions? It is impor-
tant to be aware of the changing conditions and attitudes,
and to take advantage of them in the development of future
educational provision.
By not defining these questions more clearly, the challenge
is that the school, teachers and programmes are then
‘caught in the middle’ and matters become blurred for both
the students and the teachers. This ‘in between’ situation
offers potential, but could also operate as a weakness. The
weakness is that ‘anything goes’ and one doesn’t really fulfil
any of the roles or explore any of the changing conditions
properly. The School seems hesitant in trying to define and
communicate what the roles are, or could be. They want
both the student and the teachers to explore the ‘liminal
space’. The students find this confusing and want more
guidance. The School needs to dare to say what those ‘other’
or different roles are. And have an analytical approach to
alternative ontologies and definition of the profession.