Thesis Rant, open to the public

An excerpt from my letter to Anna:

"...I still, unfortunately, stand by what I said earlier. I feel the professors I have had stressed thinking and designing outside the "box" or the interior. After you left, I made a list of the major projects I've worked on since transferring in as a second year. Of about 10 projects I consider to be of medium or high importance (duration, detail), 4 of them were strictly interiors projects. The rest either were not related to interiors or an interior was only a portion of the project. I also feel like the projects that I have thoroughly enjoyed have included disciplinary areas besides interior design, where we have studied and designed on larger scales then zeroed in and focused on an interior involved in that scheme.

What I'm saying is I don't want to be limited to a shell or a box where I fill it with program and spec out materials and furniture. I would feel ill served as a student of design to be limited to this type of thesis project, a project where one should be allowed to focus on something they are interested in as a designer. Certainly the long list of design professions which the faculty seem to think we can work in once we graduate should apply here too (I'll attach the copy handed out to us in professional practices).

Another item I would like to point out is the mention of us not being architects or architectural students. Interesting questions came to mind after some thought.

1) Is it safe to assume that the faculty assumes the students have an insufficient amount of knowledge of structure, how buildings are built, or how the envelope of a building comes together?

2) What is the purpose of the two materials and methods courses?

3) What does this approach to thesis projects say about the potential lack of technical knowledge the Interior Architecture department is failing to impart on its graduates?

I did not take the above mentioned courses here at UNCG. I have an associates in applied sciences in Architectural Technology from GTCC. We had design projects but they lasted the entire semester and were heavily oriented towards the technical side of building. In my two years of study, I completed several houses and two commercial buildings. Part of the curriculum included studying types of construction and calculating/sizing structural members. Several of my peers went on to get jobs as CAD operators and designers for local architects and engineers (including myself).

The International Building Code with North Carolina amendments, which I became familiar with at my previous school, practically sizes members for you with charts and graphs for wood framed construction. I'd also like to mention that you don't have to be a licensed architect to build a house in North Carolina (under a certain price or size, I can't remember). With that said, if an unlicensed, informally educated North Carolinian can draw up plans for a house with the aid of International Building Code lawfully, we can do it too AND we can do it better.

The only reason I can see for thesis projects being restricted to a shell is that the faculty feel there isn't enough time to complete a project that includes the site, the building, and interior design (along with the programming and analysis).

Would it be too much to ask to let those who wish to pursue other areas, (besides interiors) do so and to create their own sites and shells to a greater extent (more then minor additions for example) then is currently allowed? I'm not talking a a full set of construction documents with the whole shebang (A,M,E,P,S,C) but perhaps at least as much attention to these areas as we've payed in previous studio projects. Does the pursuit of the other areas even have to require technical drawing? Can they be pure design, conceptual manifestations, places we use to catapult into "real" interiors? That situation would be no different then most of the studio projects we've completed thus far.

My final defense of my belief: we were not taught to design in a shell. We were taught to design everything cohesively. The thesis project restriction is at a paradoxical conflict with the pedagogy of the department. Considering this is our capstone experience as seniors, its rather ridiculous to start giving us rules now since we've been able to break and tear them asunder in every other opportunity we've been given.

I don't expect to change anyone's mind. I just wanted to share my perspective on the subject. I am only student among great thinkers and designers, faculty and peers alike. I don't feel as restricted as I did before because I've got ideas that I think can work with the current rules. I'd like to talk about them at some point after I gather my some more information...."