The ladder of profundity

Teaching graduate students is different.  Economists have opinioned that the current recession has prompted adults to return for an advanced degree given the gloomy job market, and this is true to a point.  However, when a person decides to pursue a first professional graduate degree in a design field – architecture and landscape architecture – they are declaring two things.  The first is that they want to be one; that is, an architect or landscape architect.  Secondly, they are not only willing to embark on an endeavor that just begins with earning the degree, but also that achieving their ultimate goal will commit them to years of internship upon graduation and multiple exams for licensure.

More subtly, the graduate student is also declaring something else.  They are willing to make a change.  Whatever their undergraduate and subsequent work experience, they recognize it was not work that still interests them.  They want something different for their lives.  From a highly personal frustration of being a creative spirit with little means of expression, to the altruistic attitude of being passionately concerned about human constructions and the planet’s environmental health, these students willingly commit to a serious engagement that will change their lives.

Those who teach graduate students delight in their various experiences, something that most undergraduate are simply not old enough to have developed much, while at the same time, they find their unique and varied positions a challenge to guide forward.  This necessarily means the student will take unpredictable paths to find and to climb what I call the ladder of profundity.  No matter a student’s current capability, one goal of graduate education should be the evolution of their thinking.  Unfortunately, this is sometimes disguised as a satisfaction with skill in technical advancements, which is of value, but surely they want more.  They also want to cultivate the craft of their imagination to see the world differently, and to effect change meaningfully.

Given such lofty intentions, what means do professors have to facilitate learning?  Obviously this starts with who they are:  their backgrounds, interests and motives for teaching.  It also includes the competent ability to reach students with varied learning styles.  Most importantly, it requires engagement to accompany the student in their metamorphic change with its vagueness, unpredictability and often discomfort.  Faculty who do not appreciate the courage such change requires, should not be teaching graduate students.  Likewise for professors who are afraid to change themselves.  While great programs have guidelines in place with clear markers for technical and creative achievement, they also recognize that personal development in design fields is uneven, and that they may graduate a student who has not mastered all aspects of the profession.  This is the different between a profession and a discipline.  While graduate school is one step in acquiring professional competence; it is actually more charged with equipping the student with the means to pursue the discipline profoundly.  One thing is for certain:  no one ever slips down this ladder as part of the graduate school experience, but how well they climb and how far they get is the fascinating responsibility of graduate school faculty.