5 year BArch Degree Programme
Architectural education shapes not only what a professional architect does but also how the
profession of architecture conducts itself. It is important for it to be in sync with current
times. The need of the hour is to rework the role of the architect from that of a solitary
creator to being a collaborator or a facilitator in improving the built environment. The
architectural process then, has to lay more emphasis on the relevance and usefulness of
design rather than on its uniqueness and originality. This approach to architectural design
and practice means that the studio will have to provide a platform where students learn to
co-create design options. Architectural education must move away from a pedagogic
premise oﬁdentifying design ‘problems’ and teaching to create design solutions, towards
teaching to negotiatedesign options and working in a multidisciplinary team. If the merit of
design lies in its social relevance rather than its signature style, then it will have to be taught
and assessed accordingly in the studio.
The social relevance of a program hinges on whether it is true to its cultural context.
After decades of experimenting with European and American designs and styles and by
mostly failing to deliver relevant solutions it is perhaps time to look more closely at what
our context really is and then ask what it needs. The Indian context and its many regional
sub-contexts are very different from its European and American counterparts. The layers of
our social and political histories, our cultural and architectural traditions, and the sheer
variety of our communities and their needs mean that the architectural curriculum needs to
address all these determinants of our built environment in the design studio.
The program will also have to take into account the ‘feminisation’ of the profession.
This is in a philosophical term to indicate how architecture is taught and practised in a less
aggressive and more nurturing manner, and also points to the growing number of women
joining the profession. Seventy percent of our students and more than ﬁfty percent of our
faculty in SSAA are women. This ought to have some bearing on how the program is taught
and learnt. While not suggesting that it must cater to the majority, the program is sensitive
to women’s needs as students and as architects. The architectural profession has to help
women practice as successful architects by providing them a compassionate environment to
ﬂourish in, and this begins in the Schools.
The design studio forms the core of the curriculum in the ﬁrst three years. Each semester
adopts a project that is developed in the studio aided by pedagogical inputs from two packs.
The two packs of subjects that feed into the design studio can be broadly categorised as
‘Thinking’ and ‘Doing’ subjects. ‘Thinking’ pack includes: History, Critical Thinking, Research
Method, and Multidisciplinary Approaches to Negotiating Design. ‘Doing’ pack includes:
Building Construction, Structures and Services. The design project progresses in complexity
over the three years from addressing individual needs (room, house, ofﬁce) to a collective
requirement (institution, housing and the urban and historical context). The project adopted
can be ‘actual’ or ‘hypothetical’ but will include the widened ambit of the scope of the
profession. Architectural inputs into critical, curatorial and conceptual practices of design
negotiations that intersect with ﬁelds of art and visual culture, and with conservation and
In addition to these subjects, a supplement of ‘skills modules’ will form a pool of
electives that the student can choose from over the years depending upon individual
interests and aspirations. These can include, depending on demand from the design studio:
Digital Fabrication, Parametric Design, latest computer software, traditional material
techniques, preservation and restoration techniques, statistical data managing, and so on.
If the method of design is negotiation, then it cannot be assessed in terms of a
solution to a problem, but evaluated as an embodiment of an ideology, a stance, an
approach and an attitude. So the prevalent mathematical way of judging a design problem
in terms of how it is solved poses two problems: one, identifying the ‘problem’ and two,
considering design as a problem-solving exercise. In the redeﬁned role of the architect as a
collaborator, design is what can be negotiated, given the relevance and context. So good
and bad design must negotiate its status in terms of what is viable, relevant, and
Master of Architecture Programme