[excerpt] I must open by stating that I am primarily an urban planner, not an architect, though I have been associated with schools of architecture throughout my professional life. I must also add that I do not feel that I am fully acquainted with the working of the School of Architecture here in the University of Singapore, so that some of my comments may not be entirely accurate or relevant to the situation here.

Having said that, I would like to turn to the general approach to architectural education elsewhere in the world. First, we must all realize that the whole system of university education is becoming more and more oriented to the felt needs of the student body. In the case of architectural students this tends to take four forms:-

  • First, a widespread distrust of the traditional emphasis upon the visual aspects of design, and upon drafting skills  
  • Second, a general demand for a far more liberal education. Today's architectural students are tired of being classed with medições as 'illiterates' (or people who have never done any serious reading since they left high school, except for the books and journals that relate directly to their professional field).
  • Third, a demand for a far more immediate social involvement. Architectural students are well aware that the days of the private individual client have given way to the 'community client,' and that they have to find a way of learning how to discover and interpret community needs.
  • Fourth, there is an increasing interest in a systems approach to architecture, involving much more mathematics and the use of computer technology. On the other hand, architecture - like medicine and engineering - is a profession that demands that its practitioners are fully competent to undertake operations that require great public confidence in their professional ability. This means there must be some basic standards of performa