it’s the work, not the label
I remember having an accreditation discussion with Bill last July, though if I remember correctly, the topic came up after a few glasses of beer at a small, Viennese kitchen table. It started with Bill starting the discussion under no assumed biases either for or against, and then sitting back to listen to a jet-lagged, slightly inebriated response. It’s a discussion I’ve thought about several times since then, especially during the two month period that both WAASC and NAAB (the respective regional and national accreditation boards) that visited Sci-Arc last October and November. During this rather stressful time of preparation, presentation, and reflection, I also questioned the purpose of accreditation at an institution that surely has the best interests of architectural investigation and education in its forefront. It was during this time that I came to my own opinion that accreditation does not matter… though perhaps not in the same way others may argue.It seems that the most important issue is the creativity of the work that is produced, the experiences that are gained, and the minds that are cultivated. Accreditation does not guarantee any of these things, in the same way that the refusal of accreditation does not ensure an automatic edgy or radical status. I’m less interested in the pedagogical ramifications as a result of accreditation as I’m convinced the quality of the school, its students, and the work produced is substantially more affected by the leadership of the school and the day-to-day interactions between instructors and students, than it is the status of its degree granting capacity.
This said, however, I would tend to support accreditation, or at least a strategic plan that included a direction towards accreditation down the road. This support is largely, if not entirely, based on the financial aid opportunities of future students attending the school, especially if accreditation meant that certain financial (and resulting mental) stresses would be alleviated for a lot of the students through easier access to grants, fellowships, and affordable student loans. While we might leave the matter of the type of students Umbau should seek for another discussion, we perhaps should be concerned about missing out on great students that want dearly to be a part of Umbau, but can not due to financial limitations.
As this discussion continues, it would be helpful if we can start to reference specifics with regards to NAAB’s process. Ultimately, it seems like the most prudent decision will be one that is made less on preconceptions we may all have on the matter, but rather on solid facts such as:
- Costs involved (both literal and time/energy costs)
- Pedagogical expectations from the accrediting agency
- Timelines involved for candidacy vs. full accreditation
- Limitations on creative/unusual learning experiences