Opinion: Perspective on Architecture as a Learned Profession
By Steve Schreiber
Learned professions—such as law, medicine, engineering, architecture—require specialized education, rigorous training, and adherence to ethical standards. During my tenure as president of the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB), the question of whether architecture should continue as a learned profession—or shift toward being more of a vocation/trade/craft—has sparked significant debate within the field. Several factors must be considered when examining the importance of this definition in shaping the future of architecture, the role of education and licensure, and the complex issues surrounding the evolution of architectural practice and its standards.
The Role of NAAB and Architecture Education
NAAB plays a central role in defining the standards of education for aspiring architects in the United States and internationally. By accrediting professional degree programs in architecture, NAAB ensures that architecture education maintains rigorous criteria for quality, competence, and ethical conduct. A professional degree accredited by NAAB is typically a prerequisite for licensure in most jurisdictions. NAAB’s role in shaping architectural education is to provide a framework that ensures students are prepared not only with technical knowledge, but also with the critical thinking, design skills, and ethical grounding necessary for effective practice.
Some architecture organizations have questioned the necessity for specialized education, suggesting that competencies could be evaluated through practice or examination, bypassing the need for post-secondary education. The counterargument to this perspective is that such an approach undermines the foundation of architecture, which relies on a broad knowledge base and critical thinking skills to address complex and interconnected design, social, and environmental challenges.
One motivation for reconsidering the formal education requirement is the belief that more flexible, experience-based routes could open the profession to a more diverse group of practitioners. While this intention is commendable, it overlooks the strides that the academy has made in increasing diversity within the profession. Over the last two decades, architecture schools have become more inclusive, offering opportunities for underrepresented groups, particularly women and people of color, to enter the profession. Thus, the notion that non-education paths will better support diversity is flawed. Architecture schools remain essential in preparing a diverse workforce of architects who not only possess not only technical proficiency but also the ethical and intellectual depth necessary to the profession.
Quality Assurance in Architecture Education
One of the key components of architecture as a learned profession is the quality assurance mechanism that ensures graduates are prepared for the complexities of architectural practice. The accreditation process, led by NAAB, serves as the primary vehicle for quality assurance in architectural education. Critics argue that while it ensures a certain level of uniformity and quality in educational programs, it does not always align with the dynamic and evolving needs of the profession. Additionally, some believe that the system of accrediting programs does not sufficiently account for the diverse ways in which architecture practice unfolds across different contexts, such as urban, rural, or international environments.
In an era where architecture is increasingly interdisciplinary and collaborative, students must be equipped to tackle broader societal challenges—such as sustainability, urbanization, and social equity—that go beyond a checklist of competencies. Therefore, the system of quality assurance must evolve to better reflect these challenges, emphasizing not just technical competence but also critical thinking, creativity, and a commitment to societal well-being.
Experience vs. Education: Can Experience Replace NAAB Education?
The debate over whether experience can substitute for formal education in architecture is not new. Some advocates of experience-based pathways to licensure, such as the NCARB proposal to allow more flexible routes to certification, argue that real-world practice should be valued as highly, if not more, than formal education. However, this raises critical questions about what competencies architects need to truly function effectively in the field.
While experience is invaluable in developing practical skills, certain fundamental aspects of architectural practice—such as design theory, urban history, and the ethical dimensions of decision-making—are best taught in an academic setting. A purely experience-based approach risks neglecting the broader conceptual knowledge required to address pressing global challenges, such as climate change, social justice, and equity in the built environment.
Conversely, the value of NAAB-accredited education should not be seen as a replacement for the Architectural Experience Program (AXP) or the Architect Registration Examination (ARE). Education and hands-on experience are complementary; education lays the groundwork for theoretical and critical understanding, while AXP and ARE help bridge this knowledge with real-world practice. Both are necessary to form well-rounded professionals who can navigate the complexities of architectural design and practice.
Ethics and Shared Values in Architecture
One of the defining characteristics of any profession is its commitment to a set of ethical standards and shared values. Architecture, as a learned profession, carries a particular responsibility to not only design for aesthetic and functional purposes but also to serve the public good. The NAAB’s Conditions for Accreditation incorporate ethical considerations, but they primarily focus on professional practice, including issues such as social responsibility and sustainable design. It is essential that ethics be woven throughout the architecture curriculum and not confined solely to professional practice courses.
Ethics in architecture encompasses responsibility to communities, the environment, and future generations. In this regard, architecture education must emphasize the broader societal impact of design decisions and prepare students to confront the ethical dilemmas that arise in practice. Ethics is a central tenet that guides every aspect of an architect's education and eventual practice.
Conclusion
While experience-based paths may play a role in licensure, they should not replace the essential educational foundations that prepare architects to tackle complex, multidisciplinary challenges. As the profession evolves, its focus must remain on critical thinking, ethics, and social responsibility to ensure that architecture remains a force for positive change in the world.
This article represents the personal views and opinions of the author and not necessarily a formal perspective of NAAB or any other organization or individuals.