Architecture and the Built Environment Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateEarl of Clancarty
Main Page: Earl of Clancarty (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Earl of Clancarty's debates with the Department for Work and Pensions
(12Â years, 2Â months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Whitaker, for the opportunity to participate in this debate. The report in question, as one led by an architecture practice, emphasises the immediate built environment, which to me feels refreshing. The report rightly stresses the significance of school education, a central aspect of which should be an awareness of the importance of, to cite the review,
ââyour home, your street, your neighbourhood, your townâ where the smallest part, your home and your street, collectively make an enormous contribution to the future of our planetâ.
There are many contexts for the study of architecture. The distinction between public and private space is one crucial context not addressed in the report. The first place where the child experiences architecture in a meaningful way must be their home; a good topic, surely, for a childâs first learning about architecture
The reality is that architectural and planning decisions are being made every day around us. My young daughter was aghast when she went to our local playground only to find that many things, including her favourite climbing frame, had disappeared and been replaced by other equipment. She got used to the changes, but she did feel left out of the decision-making processâas, in the wider sense, do many adults about the planning process, and increasingly so, despite the coalitionâs long-standing localism agenda. The right as a citizen to have a say in oneâs architectural environment should be taught in schools. That should include at least one visit to the local council.
Architecture is clearly not only about history or about famous buildings, important though they are, although the national curriculum would have us learn first at key stage 2 who the so-called great architects are. If this report is to be taken seriously, then we should be looking carefully at the tone and content of the national curriculum.
The report stresses the importance of teaching. It states:
âArchitecture, the built environment and an understanding of âplaceâ ... through many different subjects including art and design, geography, history and STEM subjects ⌠rather than as a subject in its own rightâ.
That multifaceted approach fits with what architecture schools want.
A problem, however, with this approach is that art and design are under increasing threat, particularly in state schools, and less so in independent schoolsâas is teacher training in these subjects. This is well demonstrated in a new survey by the National Society for Education in Art and Design, which also makes clear that these are things which the Government have in their power to rectify. If these trends continue, success will be made more difficult for some of the good ideas that this report contains, such as the local âurban roomsâ that could be used for school outreach work.
I was taken with the idea that councillors should have training in design literacy. At a time when the public have less and less faith that the right planning decisions are being made, this can only be a good thing, although it would mean public money being spent on this, as well as in other areasâdespite the plea for volunteeringâif this reportâs recommendations are to be followed through.