Portfolio Planning

Architectural Drawing: An Inquiry III

Is it out of nostalgia, the love for the past or the critique of the present, I dont know. Why do we always find our pasts comfortable than the present? This post is a continuation of the dialogue on drawing as an act. And in this section, I am thinking of the tools we used to draw, versus those used today.

I am perhaps trying to document shift in a certain kind of drawing culture. The shift has caused changes, and through my own bias, I undervalue them. Shift in culture of doing things changes values we associate with them. 

(Typing has become boring and in my note book, I make very diagrammatic notes - like concrete poetry. The interface of a blog in its conventional format does not allow it. So these days, most of my posts end up becoming very fractured and without elaboration. Pardon for that - that is also a culture shift). However, I will try to explore diagrammatic writing on this interface. 

Below is a list of activity > old tool > new tool list. All activities are related to drawing:

Activity	Old tool	New Tool	Remarks
Drawing a line	Lead wooden pencils: minimum grades	Lead wooden pencils: multiple grades Clutch pencils with different points	Students use different pencils to draw different intensities of lines.
Sketching	Coal / Coke sticks	Charcoal pencils	The way in which one handled a charcoal stick changes, hence the way in which one draws changes
Erasing	Conventional cubic erasers	Pencil erasers Erasing shields	Students take lesser care in the first step of drawing
Inking	Rotring pens	Microtip rotrings Stabillo	The care taken to make edges meet is lesser. The care taken to preserve the tool is lesser.
Straight lines	Foot rule, drafter	Rolling scales, adjustable setsquares, stencils, etc	Things happen faster and the culture of cross checking dimensions is fading away.
Sharpening	Cutters / blades	Sharpeners, electronic sharpeners, etc	Sharpeners are becoming redundant with the coming of clutch pencils.

Students now carry different pencils to achieve different grades of lines. Back in our times, our professors taught us to use a single pencil to create a variety of line intensities just by correct application of pressure. Is it too late to re-instill in students this value - since the uses of using only on pencil are purely logistical - it saves the time you spend in switching tools and it saves the space the new tools would otherwise occupy. It also avoids chances if losing or buying expensive items.

Tools are always devised to overcome shortcomings. Few baseline shortcomings can be underlined as the issue of speed and the issue of facility. These ideas take larger meanings over time, than just their functional values and tools become objects to possess. 

In the remarks column, all statements point at a certain way in which value system is changing. Our ways of looking at a drawing versus the students way of looking at a drawing must be imagined through the process in which the current generation is operating. Otherwise, we may leave ourselves dissatisfied with the kind of product the students are offering us.

-----

WORKING QUESTIONS:
Do our tools control us? 
Or has the possession of these tools become a style statement?
Or are there new deficiencies of skill which have devised new tools? What does it say of our culture? Do we belong to a culture that capitalizes upon every kind of human activity - whether efficient or deficient? 

Newness

In the first year of architecture, it is so difficult to make students understand the idea of the 'new'. Students gyrate to nake something familiar. Something that they have already seen. Most methods to make them understand or take towards the unfamiliar are resisted. Under such cases, we see cliches. This is where the production of kitsch happens. To imagine the already seen out of some thing that has been a part of the everyday and has been used to create the seen thing earlier produces a kitsch.

The process of instilling the 'new' for us is pedagogically addressed as 'unlearning'. Unlearning is the notion of undoing thinking in the structures in which we are made to think by far in our life. At many instances I have wondered why must architects think absolutely out of the world? In the deep thoughts of our mind, we all want to be different, we all want to create different-'looking' things, we all want to create different things that what already exist. And after doing that, we want to debate about culture.

Culture heavily looks at familiarity and tries to root you in your context. Something that is completely contrasting to the above! These thoughts keep crossing my mind! It's funny, since I want to study culture to offer 'new' solutions! Sometimes, Dushyant's philosophies haunt me. But I have decided for myself that I am going to engage constructively with the material world as far as possible.

Coming back to the idea of new, we force students to create 'new' objects, often from the familiar. This is done through a series of operations from different disciplinary mechanisms. For example, we would take language, then mix it with visuals, then films and then sound and then building - all which have different languages. We basically want students to create uncanny objects - which are strangely familiar. We haven't devised enough methodologies to achieve fascinating results though.

Re-living Academy's Past

Suresh Singh has been officially re-appointed at the new Principal of Academy of Architecture.

I have always liked his systematic approach at managing things. His managerial skills are impeccable and I particularly remember how well he handled out building construction submissions during third and fourth year. He is a no nonsense person and believes in taking only tangible action. Although over the past few years, I have found him to become more and more cynical of the bureaucratic situations that he has been handling and grinding into. This must have rubbed off all his energies and enthusiasm.

But larger agendas for an institution can not be overlooked. My father always gives me the example of how graciously the old President welcomes the new one in the US inspite of whatever differences they may have. This is a sign of accepting a decision of the people and allowing fair chance to the new candidate to perform as per one's visions.

I thus welcome our old principal. Probably a benchmark to attain or gauge from here where the school goes must be laid down. As I prepare to sign off from the school, I will be keen to look at where it reaches two years from now...

Fact File
(personal observations)
the list would go on! 

Old v/s New

The first thing he did as he entered the principal’s cabin was removing the brass idol of Ganesha.	The first thing he does is to garland the large brass idol of Ganesha and light up incense stick .
He locates the problem for poor performance of students in the teaching methods.	He locates the problem for poor performance of students in the students themselves
He believed that rules must be challenged in order to progress.	He believes in the Dhirubhai Ambani rule: Never challenge / question the government
“The whole system is bloody stale”	“Why do you want to get into the mess?”
Believed in redefining the way in which system works.	Believes in obliging with what University has laid down for us.
Believes in taking the right decision (as per his knowledge) without necessary consent of the management.	Will not move any card at all without the consent of the management
Professional Practitioner	Associate Professor by qualification
Has only two degrees: B Arch & M Arch	Has collected numerous degrees
Makes people under him work hard	Makes people under him happy
Pushes for productivity quotient	Pushes for high happiness and satisfaction quotient
Fights for his principles	Keeps his principles and fights for his designation
Was disliked by most non teaching staff	Favourite of most non teaching staff
Pro technology	Semi technology
Pro young generation	Old school
What new are we doing?	What is the need to do new?
Optimistic	Cynical
Man with large messy ideas	Man with simple, less, effective ideas
Man concerned with intellectual progress	Man concerned with physical progress
Exposure level: Global	Exposure level: Indian
Personally writes recommendation letters for outgoing students	Asks students to write their own recommendation letters

Architectural Drawings: An Inquiry II

In conjunction to my previous post on Architectural Drawing, I wanted to bring to forth some examples for the elaboration of ideas expressed earlier. These voyeuristic pictures are taken in an examination hall - during a History exam, where students were expected to explain several structures by sketching them out. Most of these sketches are appalling, with little sense of scale, proportion or any architectural value. If I may say, these are more like diagrams which 5-8 year old children would make as their first impression of a building. The do not even have the sensuality of medieval artistic drawings.

This is not to say that such students can not become architects. But what is happening to the emphasis of the course on drawing? Computer softwares have definitely challenged the traditional ways of hand drawing, but which architecture college in India is that software savvy? We do not even have sufficient infrastructure to deal with such softwares in institutions. Therefore, it may not be wrong to assume the strong dependence of our curriculum on hand-drawing. Having said that, at the third year level, do we expect basic buildings to be drawn like above? Three years in the course, are we obliged to tolerate such frivolous attitude in the canonical understanding of built forms (scale, proportion, etc.) from students?

Does architectural education need to depart from drawing as an essential skill to be able to understand built environments? What possible re configurations in the physical environment can we imagine if
a. we have drawings like the above?
b. if drawings are not a part of architectural education?
c. if drawing as a medium is replaced by some other medium / tool?

etc.

It's time to seriously think what pedagogical turn we need to take, given the huge amount of intake in architecture courses, where we attract a thick bunch of students who do not necessarily have any aptitude for this field. We are just entertaining them on the money they have paid! Again, I might sound cynical. But the point is that if we need to maintain the wide spectrum of the course so as to allow all such kinds of people (interested and non interested), we need to harness any kind of potential they may have in pursuits of architecture.

(I am sure I am terribly unclear in the above paragraph - but the non-clarity is intentional, since i may end up becoming too narrow minded and biased in my opinion)

I think as basic exercises, following is what could be done in history classes:

1. Draw a square using scale
2. Draw a square without using scale
3. Draw a rectangle 
4. Make an octagon using a square
5. try drawing a circle without a compass
6. Draw a circle inscribed in a square
7. Draw 4 equal squares to make a single larger square
8. Draw two rectangles that make one square
9. Draw two squares which are 8 squares away from each other
10. Find the centre of a square

And the list continues. These are basic geometric principles we studied in our schools and most students seem to have forgotten it. Since this is school knowledge, one can not even debate about the entry of all kinds of fields (science, arts, commerce) into architecture. All above questions are directly manifestations of buildings. These are the ways in which our ancestors too must have devised systems to make their spaces. But anyway, one can go on. I am just trying to find out ways in which we tackle the current crisis...We are in an age of extreme ignorance.

Architectural Drawings: An Inquiry

At architectural schools all across the city of Mumbai (even India), there is an increasing discontent within the entire faculty body with respect to the quality of architectural drawings (the drafted drawing)  produced by the students. They complain of the lack of understanding of space and the inability to express their ideas of space through the taught skill of architectural draughtsmanship. The faculties who teach architectural drawing today have essentially been trained in an era where hand drafting was the norm and there was an aesthetic value ascribed to the quality of drawing one produced. Such training not only set their architectural flavour, but also their aesthetic choices. Architectural drafting, then, was an art form in itself. Such notions have come under reconsideration not only due to new preferences of production of architectural drawings (drafting and modeling softwares, etc.), but the direct influence of drawings on similar bland urban environment.

Over the past year, I did an exercise several times to ascertain my doubt with the reason behind terrible architectural drawings prepared by students from first till the final year of the B Arch course. I would draw out a basic architectural plan on the board showing various components of a house, using the accepted universal convention of architectural drawing (solid lines in varying intensities for elevation, dark thick lines for section, dotted lines for hidden elements of the building, cut-lines, crosses for voids, etc.).  The plan (typically a one-room house) would have a clear entry, plinth, doors or windows and a courtyard to be able to suggest an open space inside the house.

Then I would turn to the students and ask them to draw out a 3-dimensional visualization (a basic isometric sketch) of the same drawing. Given the bare basic drawing of a single room space, the sketch should not take more than 15 minutes to complete. However, even second year students would find it extremely difficult to draw out a simple room with basic operations of punctures, as shown in the drawing. At the end of this sketching time, I would find a range of responses:

1. The basic proportions of the 2d drawing are lost in the 3d. In certain cases, where the height was not mentioned, students were unable to imagine a comfortable (or at least conventionally accepted aesthetic/functional height) for the space.
2. The levels inside the house / room are not understood. A simple step down for a water body or a single step down for a court containing a tree is apprehensively interpreted with great difficulty as something unusual. 
3. The windows do not assume a logical sill level.
4. Elevation lines of parapets, porticoes or steps or ledges are mis read as high walls, or floor patterns, or nothing –they do not show any signification on the 3d visual.
5. Things that we assume: plinths, steps to go up, ledge to be of low height or parapets of a basic height, are drawn haywire. 
6. Dotted lines of voids, overhangs, roofs or canopies are almost ignored.
7. On being asked about movement, no clear ideas of circulation form in their minds. They would randomly begin explaining the building through a window or a door.
8. Structural systems are never thought of, even if clearly shown in the drawing. They donot structure the drawing
9. The inherent logic of geometric proportioning of plan forms do not occur to them.
10. Thicknesses, materials, etc do not become a part of the reading, even if indicated in the drawing.

This was a big revelation to me. I had to reconsider my entire teaching and talking with the students. Since the essential medium / vehicle that facilitated our discussions and dialogue was drawing, one had to make sure that students too knew the language of drawing properly, without which a conversation is not possible.

Through our learned conventions of reading a drawing, architects immediately visualize a space through the drawing / drafting. The visualization feeds the value judgement and further helps in taking personal design decisions. We are further able to anticipate missing parts of a drawing (representation)while we look at an architectural drawing. We ‘read’ the hidden aspects like structural system, circulation, quality of light, etc which are not evidently shown on an architectural drawing. We expect our students to understand and interpret drawings like such.

The reading of architectural drawings have become binarized into solid and void.  Very few students are able to understand the depth of a drawing. Today, they essentially grasp the contained space within the walls, i.e. the black for them defines the enclosure and the white is the occupied empty space. Beyond this, there is hardly any understanding of any aspect of space - volume, material , texture, scale, etc. that takes place through the drawing. Due to this fractured reading, the thickness of value too is reduced and architecture becomes a process in merely trying to encapsulate a space in novel shapes.

In the process of drawing today, students are increasingly distancing the meaning associated with the lines in an architectural drawing. The process of institutionalization of the architectural drawing (for construction purposes) was an exercise in assigning meaning to different types of lines. Thus, the thick line signifies something that is cut in section, and a thin line in varying intensities signifies the distance of lines in elevation. Dotted lines signify something that can not be seen while symbols of shapes stand for various other things. Through such signification, architecture constituted itself as a discipline. One must investigate some of the first drawings that were ever made - to be able to understand the semantic transformation of drawing to meaning.

We have always attributed the emergence of the abstract painting form to the introduction of the camera. We are now beginning to see the close relationship between painting and drawing, or the artist and the architect. While painting remains an abstraction or a representation, buildings surpass the representational form and manifest into materials that are available for consumption. This consumption feeds lives, hence its essential separation from art is necessary. This is not to say that the artist doesnot make art for his/her living. But paintings directly can not cause physical destruction. In that frame, buildings can be violent and physically bothering.

With increasing multidisciplinary nature of the architecture course, the established institutions through which design ideas are represented (here, the drawing) are beginning to crumble before newer softwares and representations. These new techniques form a new value system, and hence we see a new manifestation in our urban environment.

On the other hand, drawings have to be made extremely simple to read and understand by the layman for easy consumption. I am referring to the mass produced brochures of the mass produced buildings in our environment, which are given out as news paper ads or handed on the streets to passers by during advertising campaigns of reality projects. This process is about converting a drawing into a seductive image. It is the beauty of the image that supersedes the architectural value of the project. In other words, various processes happen:

1. The information is reduced to container and the contained. The drawing eliminates micro information like offsets in walls, room heights, etc.
2. The interest of the customer is in size and not comfort. (the shift of value from qualitative to quantitative)
3. The colour of drawing does not carry any meaning architecturally, but works towards an appealing image.
4. Functional information (like the North sign) become symbolic (for purposes of vastu); and symbolic information (like floor tiling or sofas) become functional (that suggest a certain  lifestyle)

This is perhaps going to be a part of a larger pedagogical work that I may undertake soon.

Final Juries

In final juries, all look good - the students, their work and the premises of the college! At the end - people are able to put their work together in a perspective. One sees different kind of students - those who keep peeping into other people's juries, those who keep preparing on their own presentation, those who help others until their turn arrives and those who are till the last minute, completing their own work. I was definitely amongst the last kinds.

The more I think of the past, I feel how futile it is to keep finishing one's incomplete work. Instead, one must strategize how to cover up the undone or incomplete work. It's the talking that takes much care at the last minute. In thinking the talk, one also clarifies why one was not able to finish certain aspect of a work. One is able to consciously look at latent priorities and decisions that just happened in the process. Juries must be confession spaces, which makes one confident of one's own process.

I used to love giving juries since it allowed me present my ideas to an external body of experts and receive absolutely unbiased critique on my projects. I would wait to have fresh perspectives and criticism on my work, to be able to take my ideas further. 

Concrete Poetry

Ground work:

1. Bring a newspaper each (any language)

2. Cut out words and phrases randomly from it. 

3. Make a pool of words and phrases by mixing all what they have cut in a single bowl/box.

4. Shuffle and take a handful of words for your art work (like lucky draw)

The Project:

1. Based on your set of handpicked words, arrange them into sentences or fragments of phrases 

2. Stick them on a sizable piece of paper. (check size with Shubhalakshmi)

3. The stuck bits of paper shall create an image that emerges or thematizes out of the text you are creating. The image may/may not relate to the larger idea of the newly constructed text.

---

Second Year B Arch Graphics Studio

---

Results to be published soon

---

Review in the head / to be published 

Principal's Principles

Principal Punde Resigns II

This post must be read in conjunction to the earlier one.

This post is constructed to understand what a Principal of an Institution can mean and do to and for an Institution. I have never seen such phenomenal amount of work done by any principal in the past 10 years that I have been associated with Academy of Architecture. And all this work has been achieved only in 2 years of holding the seat. 

So let us recount what changes our recently resigned principal, Mr. Ravindra Punde brought in the last two years:

1. SPACE: The issue of space has been central to the problems of Academy since a long time now. An architecture college needs to have a 24-hour work space, since creative process is closely linked to personal environment. 

a. Rethinking space v/s activity: Till many years, we believed that space cannot be created in the premises of Rachana Sansad, since all possible space is already occupied. It was Ravindra Punde who rethought the problem itself.  He made a quick survey of space usage versus activity; the outcome of which revealed that many activites required lesser spaces than designated. Much dead objects (old archives, records, etc.) occupied lively space of the building.

b. Obtaining NASA room: The possession for the room on first floor (which was a fairly large space used only for NASA, which lied till a long time with the bank) was taken and opened up to be used as a 24 hour space. 

c. Additional space (lift block for storage): Other opportunities of potentially opening up dead spaces for students were capitalized upon. The dead extra lift block was floored and a good amount of space on all floors was created. An information centre was created on ground floor and Stationery too was offered a gracious space. This space was to be eventually given to the students to store their models, sheets, etc.

2. INFRASTRUCTURE

a. Computers: Quotes were ordered from various companies and best of computers were ordered. About 10 new internet PCs were installed in the library given to students for surfing free (that the connection was slow must be completely kept aside from the discussion). Another 40 pcs were installed in the Computer centre.

b. Library: Systemic changes were brought in the library. Numerous books of the library, that lay with management for months on their issue cards, were got for the students back to the library. Audits were seriously checked and it was found that 1500 books have been lost over the past years. Essential books were scanned, digitized and made available to students under his instructions. “Must Read” sections were created for students. Librarians were held more accountable, and asked to perform better and more efficiently. Payments were sometimes made personally by Mr. Punde, overlooking management bureaucracy that ruined the system. An online as well as offilne membership with the British Council Library was also made available to some faculty for research and further study. Books ordered from the BCL added value to the already existing collection of AOA.An archive section has recently been created for the Institute. 

c. Workspaces: Larger ideas of faculty work spaces were envisioned. Layout plans were seriously reconsidered and all floors were made more efficient in terms of space planning. Chaos regarding space for class rooms was resolved. All this was done in conjunction to suggestions by various staff and faculty. The library plan too was reconsidered but not implemented due to the perpetual lethargy and internal politics of library staff, as well as lack of initiative from my side (I was the library in-charge). TT area and the gound floor of the college was strategically activated for student activites, allowing greater interaction with all other other departments. Most other departments took this idea forward to hold their exhibitions on the ground floor instead of their own isolated floors.

3. NETWORK

a. Logo: Academy finally got its own identity, completely through student participation. Academy’s logo – a student entry over a design competition for the aoa logo, was used for all official communication of AOA. It freed us from the long old tradition of using the Rachana logo, which overshadowed Academy, which has always been an independent entity.

b. Website: The AOA website was put together only under the instructions of Mr. Punde. Faculty worked, prepared layouts, revised and put together a completely modern face for AOA – one that very few colleges can boast of today. To the effect that I remember the bills were initially cleared from his own pocket.

c. E mail network: Academy was one of the first Architecture institutions where each student and faculty got his/her own official institution e mail id. Students could personally communicate with the faculty and voice opinions and suggestions. Faculty got a professional communication link. All this only through his professional attitude – contacting google and setting up a great long term infrastructure for college. Eventually, google sites were used for sharing documents, meeting minutes, opinion forms, etc.

4. PEOPLE

a. Best professionals: He got the best professionals in the respective fields to interact with the students. I can not count all names, but students got an opportunity to interact with most proactive people in the country.

b. Filling in Requisite staff: While the COA stipulates 16 permanent faculty, for a long time we had ONLY 6. The money was conveniently saved at the cost of students’ loss. His first action was to recruit and fill up most seats with permanent faculty who could help students, share administrative load and initiate more programs and events for students. Not only that, attempt was to hunt for better people, thinking individuals. 

c. Cross networking within design institutes at Rachana: Different programs at Rachana do not talk with each other. Scholars from all institutes within Rachana were made to interact through various elective programs. The biggest proof is the fact that the entire graphics class was taken by the Art department for the academic year 2011-12

5. EVENTS

a. Electives for all 5 years: Realizing that all students have different interests, electives were opened for all years. Inspite of space constraints, multiple arrangements were made and the program was executed. We experienced management problems, but students got to interact with diverse subjects – 10 in all, vertically across classes – for the first time as a mainstream curricular activity.

b. Open juries: A jury day – a concept never thought of before, allowed students across classes to openly view each others work, thus fostering dialogue, communication and exchange of ideas. Academy of Architecture’s energy during such juries was tripled and a new enthusiasm took over. Design professionals met and discussed ideas – the space seemed a thriving place for discussion.

c. Design Dialogue: Monthly seminar series was initiated to push design thinking in the institute. International and national experts in various fields were called and students were open to interact with them. People from the best of Universities abroad, at high teaching and professional positions were made available for discussion.

d. Vertical Studio: A 3-week intensive vertical studio was devised as an idea to tackle with the NASA lapse. This great opportunity allowed students to engage closely with the city and other issues. People from all kinds of backgrounds poured into Academy making Architecture realize its real potential and scope. Students got to talk to planners, journalists and economists face to face. At the same time, they got to interact with each other across the aided-unaided division. Huge amount of Knowledge was produced. Important ties with outside institutions were established.

e. Alumni Meet: The importance of alumni was realized and networks were re-established. These networks helped in sourcing scholarships for needy students, infrastructure building fund, important faculty and potential creative people back to Academy. Their expertise was made available to the students.

f. Awards / NIASA, CCGM, Meenal Panchal Award, etc : Selection process for awards was made more transparent and formal internal selection process was established. This system was based on mark, merit and design. Such system removed any kind of bias or favouratism, which is one of the most common complaints of students.

g. Annual Lecture: I never remember before of having an ANNUAL LECTURE. We had an Annual lecture where a prominent person was invited especially for sharing his thoughts and ideas with students – the event was made open to all students, alumni, all design professionals and other interested people.

h. Cultural Events: Long lost cultural events like the SPIC MACAY were revived. I was happy to attend a classical music session in the premises of academy after almost 6 years…

6. MONEY

a. Scholarships: Strong scholarship schemes were under the agenda of Prof. Punde. Ties with alumni were strengthened so that the needy students could be helped financially. In addition, Punde Sir was himself funding a student or two (as per my knowledge). These agendas were to be soon formalized for the subsequent years. 

b. Funding offers: Talks with various institutions and firms were on to obtain funds for building up infrastructure for the college and student community. These are countless to number and all of his professional expertise was put to best use for Academy’s growth.

c. Concessions: Bargains with companies like Autodesk, Google and such others were made to make most recent softwares freely available to all students of Academy of Architecture.

7. ADMINISTRATION

a. Tightening of rules: Rules for all staff and students were tightened. Marks and attendance finally became a serious business. On the other hand, long old permanent faculty’s collected holidays and rampant study tours were questioned as per the compendium rules. The blind rule of Mr. Pathak (administrative officer) and Vijay Chindarkar (Controller of Examination) was seriously brought under a scanner. Non-teaching staff no longer assumed superior control of the situation and they were put to more use. Lethargic people were made to work harder and work profiles of each individual were clearly defined. Roles of each person were elucidated. Induction copies were made and handed over with appointment letters. Age old letter formats were rectified and language was polished. Loopholes within language was attempted to clear out.

b. Giving appropriate compensation: All faculties’ interest in achieving pays as per the Sixth Pay commission were seriously considered and acted upon. Within one year, most faculty (permanent as well as visiting) was receiving much appreciated salaries. Again, misinterpretation of rules by redundant old babus was overthrown.

c. Efficient use of people: People who spent long hours doing nothing in their cabins were put to rigorous work. This may have attracted a lot of criticism. Making unnecessarily comfortable people work has unfortunately brought him a lot of political non-support. However, in the interest of revitalizing the inefficient functioning of the system, Mr. Punde took a lot of effort to see that each individual gave his best for the betterment of the institution.

8. REFORMS IN EDUCATION: Mr. Punde had larger vision for the future of architectural education in the country. I have had the opportunity of debating these ideas with him on multiple occasions, at length. Each time, he listened patiently and gave a sharp analysis. He realized that changes at Academy are tied to larger bodies like the Mumbai University, which dicates the syllabus of the five year B Arch programme.

a. Change of syllabus: Mr. Punde initiated a larger discussion with the internal faculty on how must the syllabus be revised so that our future architects are better equipped to handle the complexities of emerging urban conditions. Lots of meetings with numerous pedagogues and academicians took place at academy and have still been taking place. At the same time, new syllabus was proposed to the Mumbai University. 

b. Change in examination patterns at AOA: Redundancy of semester examination for all years was realized and unnecessary exams were removed. Rather, this time was to be used by students and faculty more productively to create and share knowledge instead of mugging up mundane subject notes.

c. Change in thinking: I must refer all to Mr. Punde’s own ideas finally

I hope this document shall make us realize what we lost. But at the same time, I want to use this document to ascertain that a successor to this position, if any must be ready to follow up ALL the above initiatives and keep devising newer ones for the betterment and real progress of the institution and individual.

I am deeply disappointed to have lost our Santa Claus.

Principal Punde Resigns

In the year 2006-7 there was a huge debate on a social networking website when the then principal of AOA  had to step down to make space for another one. The discussion meandered from AOA to NASA to god knows what! Names were taken, different people were accused and personal enimity was all over the website. The news soon reached the management and potential (avant-garde) faculties were removed from the system. People did not sleep for nights answering to threads of conversations and some people (outsiders included) distantly enjoyed the whole scene. We did not learn any thing from the ruckus. They have started it again over another social networking website - the blame game has already begun. Sadly, no one shall use this period for self reflection. Let us discuss larger issues here.

In the ruffle of the Principal of Academy of Architecture resigning from his post, I got to learn from Prasad Shetty the dynamic of actors that control architectural education in India. I shall discuss the rubric of this situation through multiple narratives I have voiced on my blog earlier. There is no best way to connect them, but through this very event.
---
i

ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION IN INDIA:

Three prime bodies are involved here (we shall discuss later why it is important to understand the roles of the following):

1. The Council of Architecture (COA): The Council of Architecture is the body which legitimizes a person to practice as an architect in the country. It is a national body and looks after the architectural production of the country. At the same time, it also has to regulate the architectural education in the country. Basically, it keeps a check on the logistical issues of setting up an architecture school in India. The architectural curriculum is decided by the State Universities (and hence it varies from school to school). COA hardly has any role to play in the curriculum of architectural education.

2. The All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE): This body overlooks all the different branches of technical education in the country, out of which architecture happens to be one. It  is "an advisory body in all matters relating to technical education." (source). AICTE's understanding of architecture is, without doubt, technical and hence COA is in constant tensions with AICTE. Again, AICTE is a national body. The Directorate of Technical Education is, in abbreviation, known as DTE.

3. The Mumbai University (MU): The Mumbai University is one that controls / disburses the degree to a graduate of architecture in the city. Its role is completely academic. It is more of a state body. The head of MU is the Chancellor who represents the MU in the state while it is the Vice Chancellor who does the real job of the Chancellor under his instructions.

---
ii

GAME OF MONEY:

Note that the funds for the national bodies come from the Central Government (the Centre) while that of the MU comes from the state.
Academy of Architecture is a government aided college where partially, the funds for running the college come from the Mumbai University.

---
iii

MANIFESTOES:

Rachana Sansad trust was created as an educational trust "to promote education in the field of art, architecture and ... allied disciplines" Further, it says : "Talking about the nature of Education here, even after 55 years, Banyan is our logo, representing growth, strength, stability, service and trust."(source)

Note the words : "growth, strength, stability, service and trust."

In 2009, Rachana Sansad opened a private course for architecture with questionable infrastructure in place. This was precisely for:

growth = raising money

strength = making networks and gaining power

stability = using networks to build money banks

service and trust - to whom and for whom?

Under larger question is what we read on the Academy of Architecture Website: "...As a result AOA's enlightened students step into the professional world with wisdom and confidence gained at the institute."

---

iv

CRITICAL LENS:

"A recent declaration of the Management at the Academy is that the institution has been allowed to build additional 14 floors onto itself. Although there was a huge confusion about what should be an appropriate image for the new academy, there has been no stake of the people who are using it. There was considerable debate on the design and the designer.... The lack of any history of the college restricts any outlook and participation of the students, faculties and the staff – which essentially remain the stake holders of the space..."

from: "Archiving the Academy", unpublished research proposal, Anuj Daga & Arjun Sharma

---

v

THE CASE:


Disallowed List put up at the end of the year > Some Students unhappy / disagree with decision > Try convincing Punde > Punde Firm > Students try Arm Twisting, their parents use contacts with DTE > DTE calls up Management of AOA

The DTE asked the Management of the Academy of Architecture / Rachana Sansad to reverse the decision taken by the Academic body - the Principal and the teachers. The Management gives orders to the Principal to allow the 3 influential students to escape, to which the Principal rejects - safeguarding the remaining students who may not have political contacts to save their lives. In the pressure of a decision, the solution comes out to be a resignation.

This looks like a clear case of interference of the DTE with the management of the college.
Why?

Because some rich influential parent decides to show off his/her power to save the case of his child.

What does a firm disciplined behaviour of the Academy mean to the high authority?: Spoiling relationship with the bodies that may give concessions and money for its 'growth, strength and stability'.

---

vi

LARGER QUESTIONS:

I have questions:

• Do students come to an Institute for education or to show off their money?
• Do students understand the essential difference between education and degree?
• What value systems are parents operating upon today?
• What must be the ethics of using powerful political networks?
• What do we look forward to from an Institution that claims itself to be one of the best architectural institutes in the country?

And I already had these remarks earlier:

Problematising Academy of Architecture

Socio cultural issues in Academic projects

Bourgeois culture has forced people to mistake education for a degree, which can be applied to any job to earn a lot of money. Students are completely taken by a degraded value system where parents teach them to cheat. Some parents come to us demanding unreasonable grants, to the extent of telling us "that's how it works..."

As Prof. Shinkre shrugs: "Students no longer come here for education..."

Ravindra Punde lived Noam Chomksy's essay "The responsibility of Intellectuals". Chomsky opens his essay by saying "IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies."

I have longer comments that I must not mix up with this post.

---

vii


REFLECTIONS:

Lastly, as I said four years ago, and they gave me all awards for voicing it:

We live in a "cinema for the blind"!