Epsilon Archive for Student Projects

Abstract

Ämnet för detta arbete är landskapsarkitektstudenters erfarenheter och förväntningar av att lära sig rollen som professionell landskapsarkitekt. Syftet är att skapa förståelse för de externa och interna drivkrafter som påverkar studenters beteende och inlärning samt att belysa uppenbara men bitvis dolda strukturer som ligger till grund för samtida landskapsarkitekturutbildning. Arbetet fokuserar på landskapsarkitekturprogrammet på SLU och relaterar till annat publicerat material inom ämnet. Metoden för arbetet inkluderar en mindre serie av semistrukturerade intervjuer med nyexaminerade landskapsarkitekter.

Kortfattat pekar resultaten på tydliga motsättningar där studenternas egna förväntningar inte går i linje med det utrymme de upplever sig ha att tillgodose dessa. De-ras i mångt och mycket liknande förväntningar, så väl innan som efter, är tydligt påverka-de av yttre och informella riktlinjer som ställs i opposition till universitetets förhållningssätt. Det indikerar på en struktur som göds och ständigt påverkar studenterna. Dessa strukturella motsättningar har en tendens att skapa inre så kallade rollkonflikter som i sig kan agera som blockerande faktorer för studenternas inlärning och möjlighet att i ett längre led påver-ka sin framtida yrkesroll. Vidare relaterar deltagarnas erfarenheter till teori skrivet i ämnet som påvisar ett kollektivt nedvärderande av yrkesrollen samtidigt som det råder en stark tro på yrkets vikt och potential. Det uppdagas här en tydlig ambivalens hos landskapsarkitekten.

Det här arbetet belyser strukturella tendenser med förhoppning om en breddad och fortsatt levande diskussion kring yrkesrollen som landskapsarkitekt. En diskussion som ut-vecklad och i ett senare skede med fördel skulle kunna inkluderas i utbildningen. Det för att skapa förutsättningar för medvetna och trygga studenter. Istället för att ödsla omedveten energi på motsättningar, oppositionella beteenden och identitetssökande kan mer fokus landa på kunskapsinlärning och skapandeprocesser vilket bör gynna så väl individerna som institutionen och i ett sista led hela branschen. Vidare diskuteras även hur den oppositionella strukturen är något fast och givet landskapsarkitekturutbildning eller om det går att uttyda indikationer på hur dessa kan mötas bättre eller till och med skapa synergistiska effekter.

The subject of this thesis is landscape architecture student’s expectations and experiences of learning how to act ‘professional’ during their education. The purpose is to understand better the external and internal drivers of standards of behavior in nascent landscape architecture, and to shed light on obvious but often hidden structures that underlie contemporary landscape architecture curricula. The focus of the project is the program at SLU but its implications relates to other published material in the same subject.

This project was first born from a personal point of view. In search of a theme for a thesis and my last project before obtaining a professional title I was looking for ways and methods to do this that clearly proved to be difficult within the institutional frames. I was mainly looking for intuitive and more freely ways and methods to investigate a design matter in the name om landscape architecture. I had a strong belief that the methods and the ways of doing I had learned was often too formal and did not encourage a more free and artistic approach which I was convinced should be an obvious part of landscape architecture education. Despite five years of studies I found myself surprised finding out how hard this would be. Instead I started to look for ways to design but at the same time be able to frame it scientifically so that it would fit the formal requirements. I was clearly not alone in this matter. Even though I and other students had formally been taught landscape architecture and its belonging professional role at a certain institution we had also somehow learned how to oppositional claim the winning of doing it differently. I was able to see how I as an emerging professional had learned how to act which was not directly linked to the institution´s overall approach. I could not any longer avoid asking myself - how and where did I learn to act the way I did? Instead of forcing a design matter into the frames I had set my self opposed to I was now determined to investigate what all this meant. I wanted to understand the role of a professional landscape architect by focusing on how to learn to become one. What experiences do students have of learning the role as landscape architect? That became the general question of this project. To investigate that a method was set based on a comprehensive literature study together with a series of semi-structured interviews of recent 8 landscape architecture graduates. The students were asked a couple of open questions within three major categories in witch they were able to discuss and talk freely. These category’s were:
- Expectations and perceptions of the education and the professional role
- Landscape architecture program and curricula
- Personal experiences of the role

These interviews were then analyzed together and presented as a so called “narrative collage”. They are not meant to be representative for all students at the institution at that time and they are nevertheless meant to be presented as individual portraits. By analyzing their answers and experiences major similarities that could indicate behavioral and social structures were tracked down. These hypothetical structures was then analyzed together with my personal background, that is to say my personal purpose of doing this, and the overall theory studied in the matter.

The results shows contradictions among the students where their expectations doesn’t align with the perceived capacity to fulfill these. Their expectations resemble each other and are affected on outer and informal guidelines which is opposed to the general approach of the university. This indicates a hidden structure that constantly affects the students. These structural contradictions tend to create internal so-called role conflicts that act as blocking factors for the student’s learning processes and in the long term their ability to influence their own future professional role. Furthermore, the participant’s experiences relate to theory that implicate a collective downgrading of the professional role, while it seems at the same time to be a common strong belief in the importance and the potential of the profession. It manifests a widespread ambivalence among landscape architects.

This work makes an attempt to shed light on these tendencies with the hope of a broader and continued discussion about the professional role as a landscape architect. A discussion that as developed and at a later stage could advantageously be included in the program. This to create good conditions for conscious and confident students. Instead of wasting unconscious energy on contradictions, oppositional behavior and identity-seeking, more focus can be placed on learning and creating processes, which should benefit both the individuals and the institution in the field as the entire industry. At last there is a discussion presented regarding the shown oppositional structure and whether it is just something set and self-evidential belonging to landscape architecture education or if there are any indications how these opponents could meet more smoothly or even create synergistic relations.