Dr. N. Lakshmi Thilagam

Sub Theme: Professional practice and pedagogy interface
Paper Title:
Architectural Education – Student centric CBCS curriculum towards a
new world vision
Author Name : Dr. N. Lakshmi Thilagam,

Affiliation : Professor & Director, Kalasalingam School of Architecture, K.L.U, Tamil Nadu,
India
Abstract:
Architectural education differs from its engineering counterpart in being widely disseminated
as a creative knowledge system. Apart from the analytical and critical fields of study, what
sets it apart is the extent of application and synthesis oriented courses that enables a student
to experience real life situations. However in recent times the concept of “Out-come Based
Education” has been applied as a blanket rule across most professional courses in India.
Students thus enrol more and more for industry oriented courses in order to equip themselves
with current trends. The teaching- learning process thus lacks the fundamental concept -
oriented approach towards knowledge transfer. Although systems such as “Bloom’s
Taxonomy” are adding more value to the practice of education, there is still a general lack
towards exploring individual student potential. This study aims at understanding the role of
CBCS pattern of curriculum setting in Architectural Education and how it can be aimed at
creating bright minds for a new world vision.
Key Words: architectural education, architecture curriculum, creative knowledge systems,

choice based credit system.
Introduction:
Architecture as a profession is gripped by the paradoxes of form and function, spatial and
visual, imagination and realization, modernity and tradition, to name a few. It is this very
nature of the profession as a science and as an art that has also manifested in the way
Architecture is taught in institutes. Radical changes in the Architectural pedagogy of various
schools was necessitated due to the increasing criticism on the contents of study in the early
twentieth century [1]. The attempt to “Scientise Design” [2] which had been apparent
through much of the Modern movement too was challenged. Noticeable among the changes
was the rejection of the pedagogy of the Beaux Arts School. Schools of Architecture
embraced a new spirit of exploration and experimented with methodologies borrowed from
other disciplines such as linguistics, sociology, phenomenology, philosophy and technology.
Thus each School adopted a Radical pedagogy based on which the teaching of Architecture
was focused on.
A recent survey by Design Intelligence published in Architectural Records, 2017
demonstrates this attribute were, students perceive a certain domain of excellence for
individual institutes. For e.g. Harvard is top ranked for design teaching, Cal Poly SOL is
valued for credible teaching in construction technology and materials, while MIT is much
sought after for its Design process based on digital techniques.
1. Architectural Education in India:

As elucidated by Mehta [3] India too witnessed a similar trend of curriculum definition in the
founding stages of Modern Architectural Education during Independence. While schools such
as Sir JJ School of Architecture furthered the Beaux Arts tradition left by the Britishers
other schools such as the Bengal Engineering College in Calcutta were primarily technical
focusing on engineering and construction. Premier institutes such as IITs, NITs and SPAs
have been trying to strike a balance between Architecture as a technical and as a Design
Programme, with the scale often tilting to any one side based on the Institutional philosophy.
However with the mushrooming of numerous Architecture institutes (both State funded and
Private ), the value of architectural education is being debated. This is becoming apparent due
to the increasing number of seats lying vacant in colleges in the recent years. Long working
hours, high course expenditure, lack of flexibility and an elitist outlook have not made
ARCHITECTURE a popular profession among the Indian masses. At present there are 464
institutes imparting Architecture programme in India[4] . It is imperative that the Council of
Architecture revise the B.Arch programme to be more accommodative of recent trends, as
shall be further discussed in this study.
2. Role of Curriculum in knowledge building:
In India the Council of Architecture is responsible for maintaining the standards of
Architectural education. The Council in its minimum standards of 2008 stipulates the various
subjects of study of the B.Arch programme over 2 stages . The total duration of stage 1 from
1st to 3rd year of study is 3240 inclusive of 810 periods for individual institute focus. Stage 2
covering 4th &5th years of study has 1080 periods of which 144 is recommended for electives.
Electives are reserved for stage 2 and accounts for 3.4% in the overall scheme. Among the
courses of study in both stages, Design courses have a 25% weightage of the total while
Building Construction and Materials & Structures account for 12% and 7.5% respectively.
The salient feature of the structure of study is the allocation of nearly 25% in Stage I and
13% in Stage II for individual institute focus. An analysis of the curriculum of various
schools shows that this % is once again allotted to subjects of the programme core. The
structure of study recommended by COA since 2008 has been the backbone of curriculum
design for the schools of Architecture in India and it has eventually led to the growth of a
large population of architects as “Jack of all trade and Master of none”. In the light of recent
trends in education in a digital world and with the U.G.C mandate for institutes to apply the
C.B.C.S template, it is probably time for the structure to be revised.
3. What is C.B.C.S? Why is it necessary?

Choice Based Credit System – C.B.C.S is a concept of learning system that is student centric
allowing for FLEXIBILITY, MOBILITY and RESPONSIBILITY of students based on
individual temperament and APTITUDE. As discussed by Felder [5] three important factors
affecting the teaching learning process of students are :
1. Learning Style (Information acquiring and processing)
2. Approaches to learning (Surface, deep and strategic)
3. Intellectual development levels (individual evolution based on acquired knowledge).
Felder elucidates that based on different levels of motivation and attitude, the responses of
learning will also be different. This is especially true of the present digital age where
unlimited access to information questions the fundamental role of institutes and classrooms.
The traditional classroom with a set of students with comparable I.Q and E.Q is no longer the
norm. And therefore imposing a homogenous curriculum on a hetrogenous population may
not deliver the desired result of education.
C.B.C.S as a system thus shifts the focus on the student to tailor make his own choice of
courses to attain a personalized target that develops his/ her individual potential. Such a
concept can be more beneficial for courses such as architecture wherein the built in conflict
of Science Vs. Arts can be resolved by the students themselves based on their aptitude.
4. Architecture Curriculum – Salient features from Universities abroad.

An analysis of the architecture curriculum of some of the leading universities/ institutes (refer
Table 1 ) highlights the following :
4.1 Curriculum Structure and Credit distribution :
The 5 year B.Arch course in most of the universities has a total credit limit of 160 as in
Virginia Polytechnic to a max of 176 as in Cornell University. The average credit to be
acquired per semester is 15-17 and a semester usually has 4-5 subjects of study. In most of
the universities the practice hours are high and accordingly the assessment is essentially
activity based and portfolio based. Lesser credits and more practice sessions promotes a stress
free learning environment.
4.2 Electives :
The % of electives in the total programme varies from 20% as in National University of
Singapore to 43% as in Cornell University which is the top ranked university for
undergraduate courses. Higher % of electives within and outside the department allow
students to have an interdisciplinary approach to learning. Universities such as UCL motivate
students to develop a multidisciplinary skill set by making cross curricular connections.
Higher % of electives especially motivates students with deep and strategic learning abilities
to pursue research in the subject of their choice. It also allows students with surface abilities
to develop new connections- an important feature of invention and innovation.
4.3 Critical reading and research :
Most of the universities devote 3.5% to 20 % of their credits towards courses dealing with
communication skill, writing Seminar, quantitative reasoning, critical reading & research,
analytical reasoning, ethics and leadership, independent inquiry etc...these credits are
mandatory and are to be acquired during the foundation term.
Thus a critical and inquiry based approach to learning is initiated at the very beginning. Some
of these courses can also be opted in the senior years as advanced electives as in N.U.Sor
Cornell.
4.4 Flexible stages of completion of degree :
University of Drexel offers a full time foundation course from 1st to 3rd year. And if required
a student may opt to complete the course in the second stage as part time from the 4th to the
6th year. This allows for students to be employed based on the foundation course and thus
reduce their economic burden. The employment at a professional office during the course of
study also brings in the added advantage of apprenticeship based learning to architecture.
TABLE 1 : Comparative Analysis of B.Arch curriculum structure
NOTE: All data accessed from official website of individual colleges/ universities/ institutes between 14.08.2017 to 27.08.2017.
4.5 Specialization in undergraduate:

After the foundation course within the first 3 years many institutes such as Harvard, MIT and
N.U.S allow students to opt for different specializations after Level 2. So that their bachelor
degree can be obtained in general curriculum or in specialized curriculum. N.U.S offers 4
different degrees after the same foundation course such as B.A (Arch) specialization in
Design Technology and Sustainability.
5. Architectural Curriculum in Indian Universities

 The 5 year B.Arch programme in India has a total credit ranging from 210 as in Anna
University to 300 as in SPA Bhopal. Most of the universities have a total credit of
220-250 with an average per semester credit of 23- 28. Thiagarajar College of
Architecture in Madurai which recently adopted the CBCS curriculum has a total
credit of 180 only.
TABLE 2 : Comparative Analysis of B. Arch curriculum structure in India
NOTE: All data accessed from official website of individual colleges/ universities/ institutes between 14.08.2017 to 27.08.2017.
 An analysis of the credit distribution structure (refer Table 2) in these schools show
that the % of electives in the overall programme is a meagre 2.5% as in SPA Bhopal
and 10.5% as in MNIT Jaipur. However institutes such as CEPT Ahmedabad allocate
20.5% of the courses as electives.
 The entire bulk of the credits is alloted for the programme core and very less credit is
alloted towards courses in humanities, social sciences and ability development. Apart
from a few, most schools do not have a thrust area or specialization.
 The assessment patterns are mostly examination based and since a semester on the
average has 5-7 theory based courses the stress on learning for exams is high.
 ‘Outcome Based Education’ has diverted the focus of most institutes on making
students industry ready and thereby the curriculum being driven by market forces.
This defeats the very purpose of a professional education as a thinking and analytical
domain.
 Blooms taxonomy must be conceptually used to design curriculum and syllabus, such
that the various categories of teaching- learning are addressed equally.
6. Conclusion:
At the conclusion of the study I would like to cite two significant ideas put forth by the
notable Ar. Pushkar Kanvinde: He debated that colleges should be “Sites of Learning
rather than be places that create graduates who are employable architects”. It is
imperative to acknowledge the fact that institutes are the fountainhead of any profession. And
therefore their prime purpose is to manifest knowledge in various forms from creation to
application.
He also was concerned with the idea of “Enhancement of Learning”. I believe this
enhancement of learning can be fulfilled by “resource pooling”. The idea is to generate
groups of resource persons in specific domains by identifying experience, qualified and
distinguished faculty at both the National and regional levels. This resource pool will not be
attached to any particular institute or college but rather with the COA and can be approached
by any institute that would like to benefit from the “Knowledge Bank”.
This author would like to conclude by advocating an immediate revision for the B.Arch
curriculum to be more inclusive, flexible and integrative.
Refrences:
[1] Colomina, et al., 2012, Radical Pedagogies in Architecural Education, The Architectural
Review, Sep. 2012
[2] Cross.N., Designerly ways of Knowing: Design Discipline Vs Design Science, MIT
Press, Vol 13 Issue 3, Mar 2006
[3] Mehta Jaimini,. Architectural education in India, India, 2006
[4] www. COA.gov.in
[5] Felder.M. Richard, Brent Rebecca, Understanding student differences, The Research
Journal for Engineering Education, Vol 94, Issue 1, Jan 2005.

Dr. N. Lakshmi Thilagam

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dr. N. Lakshmi Thilagam

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dr. N. Lakshmi Thilagam

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sub Theme: Professional practice and pedagogy interface

Author Name : Dr. N. Lakshmi Thilagam,

Key Words: architectural education, architecture curriculum, creative knowledge systems,

1. Architectural Education in India:

3. What is C.B.C.S? Why is it necessary?

4. Architecture Curriculum – Salient features from Universities abroad.

TABLE 1 : Comparative Analysis of B.Arch curriculum structure

4.5 Specialization in undergraduate:

5. Architectural Curriculum in Indian Universities

TABLE 2 : Comparative Analysis of B. Arch curriculum structure in India

You might also like