The construction of professional identity in architecture and landscape architecture: Convictions about skills, knowledge, and professional roles in design

This dissertation is aimed at providing an interpretation of the ways in which beliefs and norms about professional identity and legitimate knowledge in environmental design are sustained or changed. It is argued in this study that the two most common self conceptions of a designer are constructed as "master" and as "negotiator. " It is also suggested that although, in general, there is a transformation from the ideal of designer as an isolated creative individual to a politically active designer, design professions do not deliver a consistent self-conception for designers. A balanced self-conception of a designer is needed for the profession to construct an effective "philosophy of practice. " Multiple methods were used to document and interpret the variety of conceptions that exist in the profession today. A questionnaire survey was sent to architecture and landscape architecture studio instructors nationwide. Interviews were conducted to document personal variations and their examples. Through responses to questions in the survey and interviews, convictions were explored about design, research, and communication skills, professional roles of designers, sources of knowledge and inspiration, and disciplines related to design. The results suggest that instructors in the two disciplines see traditional design skills as more important than communication and research skills. Various conceptions of professional identity are explored as typologies in this study. Based on a cluster analysis of instructors' responses to the questionnaire survey, five approaches are identified regarding the conceptions of professional identity: master designers, researcher designers, communicative designers, political designers, and those who see the three types of skills almost equally important. Regardless of the approach, the most essential part of designer's professional identity is considered to be to have as much responsibility as possible for the execution of a project. Results indicate that the idea of a designer filling the role as a generalist is influenced by beliefs about the effective roles designers might take. Specialization is not considered undesirable because it is thought to be inappropriate for designers per se, but rather when the nature of the specialization itself is believed to be such as to render designers professionally less powerful.