Architectural qualification in the UK comprises three parts: undergraduate and postgraduate degrees prescribed by the Architect’s Registration Board (ARB) and validated by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and completion of a practice-based period of study. A clear mandate is set by the RIBA: design must constitute at least 50% of the degree programme; yet what constitutes design remains unclear. A ubiquitous model of architectural education thus prevails with immersive design studio classes and technical history and theory studies situated in the periphery predating both modular degree structures introduced in the 1990s and increased technical competency sought from practitioners and stakeholders in the built environment. This paper argues the case for continued risk taking in spatial design whilst presenting an increment of disruption to the model in a holistic field of study presented as a case study seeking to foster curiosity and risk in STEM for architecture.
