Response to Reading and Probe 1 Assignment

In the AIA Report on Integrated Practice, Thom Mayne put forth a professional imperative: change or perish. Not only is the statement startling, but it also tends to ring true. While my architectural education has relied heavily on physical drawings, the "outside world" of professional practice lives in a more digital interface. Why does the educational realm privilege this approach when it is hopelessly outdated? Perhaps educators have not come to terms with Mayne's insistence. Or maybe they for whatever reason do not believe him. Or perhaps there is a fundamental lack of understanding in the concepts behind the digital workspaces to adequately educate students. Chuck Eastman, also in the AIA Report on Integrated Practice, broaches the topic of the need for more widespread knowledge of the building information modeling systems within the architectural profession. It is not enough to simply use the software. If we can understand the concepts behind it, we can learn the capabilities and limitations of current software, and use that knowledge to improve upon it. While some of Eastman's ideas verged on mindless mass production, almost to the point of removing the need for architects altogether, others sought for incorporating architects, rather than software companies, into the process of creating BIM software. In doing so, architects remain an integral part of the design process, rather than a slave to those writing the software codes.