Praxis in Landscape Architecture

In the comment section of this post on whether the economy and jobs should affect landscape architecture education (i.e., lead to changes in curricula or program emphasis), Chris asks who should sound the call for change and mentions professional organizations and clients as possibilities. While not a total laissez-faire believer, I do have a healthy respect for market forces. Market forces in higher education originate with students who have interests in particular subjects and perhaps a sense of demand for a certain set of knowledge, skills, and abilities. For many subjects taught at universities, there is no need for a connection to jobs (regardless of the often-stated college degree = job connection). There is demand for education in 18th century French literature, for example, that exists apart from any expectation of employment (at least, that is my guess). Basic design education also has value on its own, unrelated to an employment outcome, and there is a market demand for design education. But I cannot help but think that there is something different about professional education, something that suggests to prospective students that employment in the profession is a likely outcome. Economic vicissitudes occur over time, and a response by professional programs to each downturn is not reasonable, especially if there is a return to a stable state within a relatively short period of time. This is where the question arises: is the Great Recession a major restructuring, a shift to an alternate state, to which education should respond? Will global and national political, economic, and social forces make change inevitable? Will students begin to ask for changes in their professional education, perhaps to demand a breadth of experiences to help them cope with whatever circumstances they find when they leave the university? And what would a restructured curriculum in landscape architecture look like?

Changemakers (or facilitators, strategists) might be professional organizations, university programs, or individuals who develop new models for practice and professional education. Those who might “sound the call” for change stand a greater chance of having an impact if major societal forces (i.e., forces of change) are recognized and taken into account. Often it is the case that would-be changemakers sound the call for change (we, or maybe you, should be doing this or that) in the face of overwhelming forces going in the opposite direction. At least, that is my opinion.