Architecture Education in UK

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) is responsible for architecture education in the United Kingdom. To attain a title of an architect in UK an individual must clear all 3 parts proposed by RIBA to become eligible for registration (RIBA, 2014). Part 1 of the RIBA constitutes a three year full time program which would award a student an honour’s in BA. Part 2 constitutes of a 2 year full time program and a student on successful completion would be awarded an M.ARCH2 degree. Following the first two parts of successful completion an individual is suppose to work for a period of two years to gain practical experience and attend an examination which is Part 3 of RIBA.

On successful completion of all 3 parts an individual can register along with the Architects Registration Board (ARB) and on successful registration can use the title of a charter architect. The ARB is responsible for registering architects and set the guidelines for the code of conduct of an architect practicing in UK (ARB, 2014).

Over the past year the proposal for changes in the structure by RIBA has undergone a lot of criticism (Hopkirk, 2013). RIBA has been following the same structure for more than five decades, but what makes the field of architecture so successful is the work carried out by RIBA for institutes as well as professionals once they have graduated. Since the role of an architect is of high calibre RIBA makes sure that only capable professionals are awarded with the title. It takes a minimum of seven years for an individual to be awarded with the title. Two years of training and five years of education makes an individual capable of handling responsibility. Even during the five years of learning i.e. part 1 and part 2 the students undergo practical modules that make them aware of the way the things are carried out in the real world. Regular lecture series are conducted by RIBA to encourage discussion and diversity of opinion.

The RIBA is responsible for the guidelines set for architecture education. The universities in the UK follow these guidelines in order to be able to carry out the course. To excel the professionals in the field of architecture, RIBA holds various workshops for their continuous professional development (RIBA, 2014). Individuals can continuously develop the skills they desire through RIBA’s CPD program along with their work. These workshops not only keep professionals competitive in the industry but also help them in enhancing their skills along with an exposure to new streams that they may be unaware.

Apart from all these activities RIBA is also responsible for registration of firms that provide architectural services. They set the guidelines for the fees and terms of contracts of an architect and hence a profession carrying out a business of providing architectural services must follow the guidelines set by RIBA. RIBA is the sole organization responsible for promoting architecture in the construction industry as well as institutions (RIBA, 2014). They promote various events in collaboration with the practicing firms for students and other professionals. They are also responsible for quality education and monitor all institutes providing any services in the field related to architecture.

RIBA is aware that the role of an architect is of great importance and hence the emphasis on clearing part 3 of the RIBA scope is a necessity. Even today when there is a need for more professionals in the construction industry it continues to follow the five decade old model as it has been proved successful. This process of RIBA (2014) ensures that only thorough professionals are awarded with the credential architect and a fresh graduate with no experience is not capable of handling a position at the apex of the hierarchy. They do believe that practical experience is as important as the theory/design drills that students undergo.

Relationship of The Construction Industry with the Educational Organizations

Education in India experiences a few systemic insufficiency. Therefore, it keeps on providing graduates that are unemployable notwithstanding rising deficiencies of talented labor in an increasing number of industries. The construction industry faces one such concern.

The construction business is the second biggest industry of India after agriculture. It makes a huge commitment to the national economy and gives business to expansive number of individuals (Swarup and Mahajan, 2001). The utilization of new technologies and project management strategies has made large scale projects conceivable. In its way of headway, the business needs to defeat various difficulties. One such major difficulty is the difference in the demand and supply of skilled professionals (Aggarwal, 2003). There have been many inexperienced professionals who are joining the construction industry due to the huge demand.

The burden of this demand has to be borne by the universities and professors who are responsible for training and graduating individuals catering to the construction industry. The framework for education has low scope and no outcomes in relation to the industry requirements, it still functions on age old practices driven by populism decades ago failing to incorporate new and advanced technology within the core syllabus.

“Technical Education plays a vital role in human resource development of the country by creating skilled manpower, enhancing industrial productivity and improving the quality of life of its people” (MHRD, 2014).

For successful industry with young professionals it is important that the education and training they undergo is rigorous and also caters to the needs of the industry. Without the support and understanding of the industry requirements it is difficult to know their needs and producing individuals using the same outdated technology and guidelines is not the current need of the industry.

There have been many inexperienced professionals who are joining the construction industry due to the huge demand. Numerous issues have been raised identifying the broken nature of the accreditation institutes with the company professionals; it poses a great cause of concern. The framework for education has low scope and no outcomes in relation to the industry requirements, it still functions on age old practices driven by populism decades ago failing to incorporate new and advanced technology within the core syllabus. There is minimal educated open verbal confrontation on education in India as a result of which the industry as well as newly graduated professionals is facing great difficulty.

The Fake Mistake // Times of India (Jan 11, 2015)

The article listed below talks about the replica made by the Tourism Department of the Ajanta and Ellora Caves. I had visited the caves a year back and had also visited the tourist center. There is no doubt that the tourist center is built beautifully and has all the necessary amenities which a public building must have. The cave replicas have been built remarkably well and it gives a sense of you having a look at the actual caves which have actually lost the charm which it had a decade back.

I was amazed to see such stuff but after reading the article many thoughts triggered in my head. As a layman I would just think the cost to build such a structure to boost tourism and on the other hand list out things in which we could upgrade the existing infrastructure. Seeing the amount that would be spent yearly for the maintenance of the fake would it not be wise to spend that much on the real caves and maintain those. The government at the end of the day can argue that the caves are not accessible for the disabled and the center was built to make it accessible for all sections but seeing the numbers present at the center i felt pity. Seeing the amount of money spend on a structure which is not even being visited by tourists is a complete waste of the tax payers money.

A fake is a fake and it makes no sense to build something which is just a couple of km away from the original. Had some thought been put and the structure built somewhere else this structure would have still made sense. The structure is built just next to the replicas and as a result the people visiting the centers are much less because the ones who visit Ajanta and Ellora visit it to see the caves and not the center. If it had been built in Aurangabad itself it would have boosted tourism further and also created a place for the people to display their art. 

Thought needs to be put when proposals are being put forward by the government and we as citizens must participate actively in such initiatives. Lastly we can at least write a letter to the ministry regarding our thoughts on the proposal. It may be ignored it may be considered but we shall not lose hoe. One day some or the other government will pay heed to its voters request.

Times of India artcile "The Fake Mistake"

Syed Rizwanullah | Jan 11, 2015, 06.01 AM IST

Some years ago, the Maharashtra Tourism Department Corporation (MTDC) had a brainwave - build replicas of Ajanta and Ellora to reduce crowding at the real heritage structures. Now, Rs 125 crore and two years later, the amateurish thermocol fakes hardly draw visitors and are a huge drain on the exchequer. 

The irony is that the MTDC spends Rs 10 crore for the upkeep of these white elephants while the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) spends Rs 1 crore on the original Unesco world heritage sites. 

Built at a cost of Rs 125 crore, the two replicas - Ajanta Visitors Centre and Ellora Visitors Centre - were meant to allow curious tourists a closer look at the treasures inside. Ajanta contains fabulous murals while Ellora is home to India's greatest collection of Hindu sculptures. Officials now admit that footfalls at the replicas barely cross double digit numbers on any given day. Now compare this to the original caves. "An average of 2,500 people visit Ajanta caves and about 5,000 visit Ellora caves each day during the tourist season,'' says Madan Singh Chouhan, superintending archeologist, Aurangabad circle, ASI. 

There are good reasons for this lack of tourist interest. For one, the replicas look nothing like the real thing. "I thought it was a factory when I saw it from a distance. It is really ugly and out of sync with the landscape," says Ashoke Sarkar, senior professor with BITS, Pilani, who visited the caves recently. 

Second, the fake structures are built very close to the caves — the Ajanta replica is 4km away from the original and the Ellora duplicate a mere 500 metres away. "Why should tourists from distant places visit a duplicate cave?'' asks Amol Basole, secretary of the Aurangabad Tourist Guides Association. "It would have been better if the replicas were set up in Aurangabad or another metro.'' 

The low footfalls mean that there is hardly any revenue generated to meet the maintenance cost. "We have given the maintenance contract for the visitor centres for Rs 6 crore. Then there is the additional monthly expenditure of Rs 10 to 15 lakh on electricity and other utilities,'' says Pandurang Kulkarni, senior regional manager, MTDC. 

Experts say there is a bigger worry — there is extensive use of thermocol, an inflammable material, in the replicas. A layer of thermocol, fitted in wire meshes and layered with Ferro cement, has been set on the concrete base of the visitor centres. The idea was to recreate the rough look of a cave wall. Thermocol has been used to create walls, pillars and ceilings and various figurines. 

"espite its advantages, polystyrene is brittle and flammable. It could also attract rats,'' says Prof Ram Mane of the department of chemistry, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University. Satish Soni, joint managing director, MTDC, defends the use of thermocol. He also asserts that it was not the only material used to build the replicas. 

The pioneers of the Ajanta Ellora Development Plan say they had conceptualized something very different. "The replicas have nothing to do with the original plan, which was simple and stayed close to the old style," says Dev Mehta, former managing director of MTDC and the brain behind the plan. 

State INTACH co-convener, Mukund Bhogale, says the interpretation centre was a good concept. "But the replicas are a disappointment. The way they were executed, the way material like thermocol was extensively used, it doesnt give a good feel or experience to a tourist.'' 

One of the reasons why the replica seemed like a good idea was that visitors to the caves were never allowed to get too close to the priceless and fragile art works inside or photograph them. But visitors to the replicas too are asked to stay away from the installations. 

Kishor Nikam, a photographer, shot more than 2.5 lakh images of the original painted caves for the replicas. These were then printed on sandpaper canvas and meticulously pasted on the concrete walls. Nikam defends the MTDC's decision to not allow photography inside the replicas because flash light could cause his images to fade in 10 to 15 years. But he too concedes that his work would have had better exposure if it was displayed some distance away from the old caves.