The Spatial Practice Bachelors and The Union of Spatial Practitioners

Group 1: Amy Wallace, Ayanna Adannay Blair-Ford, Claire Greenland, Emily Chooi, Daniel Innes and Helena Francis.

Our group proposal of a Spatial Practice Bachelors degree and Union of Spatial Practitioners arises from a critique of the existing design education and industry systems. We collectively argue that in order to understand the very real barriers which face within the UK’s construction industry in relation to sustainable, economic and social practice, it is essential to re-examine the overarching structure of the system. We believe that an integral reason why current practice struggles to provide effective sustainable development models is the hyper-specialisation and fragmentation of job roles within a design team. The clear, and often fetishized distinction between the concept of an ‘Architect’’, ‘Engineer’, ‘Contractor’, ‘Developer’, make it impossible to work effectively as a single team on collective development goals. Goals that should be centred around sustainable and social justice practices. It is our belief that this division begins at education level and is continued through institutional and policy assemblage.

The educational model we propose focuses on the establishment of a common Spatial Design degree, which is undertaken by the majority of people entering spatial fields, rather than just those who we would today think of as ‘Architects’. This degree is complemented by a series of specialist masters, which provide more specialised, and more specific knowledge; for instance, an MSc in Facade Systems, or an MA in Spatial Cognition. Our second proposal, a Union of Spatial Practitioners, is a conceptual union of schools and faculties that break down the realm of Spatial Design. We propose the Union would take on the responsibility for regulating the work provided by its members in the sector, whilst advocating for social, economic and climatic justice.

Throughout our individual essays we centre conversation around our pitch proposal as well as the wider socio-political landscape of the built environment which requires a critical appraisal. We acknowledge that the current gatekeepers in this process are the Royal Institute of British Architects and Architects’ Registration Board, who lay a territorial and legal landscape over the sector. These institutions are highly bureaucratic, centralising power in an inefficient and unproductive way.

Our conviction is that the practising of environmental and social justice cannot happen through operating in isolation, by simply tinkering with a machine which is no longer fit for purpose, and somehow expecting it to function differently. While the mechanism of our system makes change in a specific area (the sharing of knowledge and skill in an expansive industry) we believe that this will play a key role in establishing the groundwork for the much larger structural change which is so urgently needed.

Collectively, we explore topics of economic, social and environmental justice in the sector. We present conversations on:

1. Abandoning the Masters House — Ayanna Adannay Blair-Ford

2. To what extent does construction professionalism require external regulation, and how is this usefully implemented? — Daniel Innes

3. Health and Safety in a Post Grenfell Construction Industry — Helena Francis

4. An Education Curriculum Set in the Past - Progressive Steps Towards a More Just Curriculum within the Architectural Profession and Beyond— Claire Greenland

5. Operating in or Outside the Tent — Emily Chooi

6. The Presence of Unionism in British Architecture — Amy Wallace