Architectural Education after Schön: Cracks, Blurs, Boundaries and Beyond

It is quite extraordinary that architectural education remained un-theorised until the 1970s when Donald Schön, following his studies of the design studio, put forward the notion that design studio learning simulated real professional action (1983, 1985, 1987). Schön subsequently presented architectural education as a paradigm for all professional education (1987). Schön identified a number of key elements in architectural education that together constituted his theories of ‘reflective learning’ and the ‘reflective practitioner’. Central to Schön’s understanding of learning to design were two concepts. Firstly, the necessity for students to engage in studio-based projects that simulated the complexities of real life projects. Secondly, the importance of reflection in the design process that was constituted of: reflection-in-action, reflection-on-action and most critically reflection-on-action that allowed students to observe and re-align their thinking with the ‘expert’ thinking of their tutors. Arguably, Schön’s notions of reflective learning have framed most of the discussions about architectural education to date. This paper will argue, somewhat paradoxically, that Schön was a remarkably unreflective thinker. To evidence this claim the author will attempt to demonstrate a number of significant epistemological, ontological and methodological weaknesses in Schön’s work. Further, the author offers a number of alternative theories of knowledge and learning that might begin to ameliorate some of Schön’s weaknesses and thereby enrich the contemporary understanding of the relationship between architectural knowledge, practice and education.