As time evolved, we front-end loaded design studio projects. You would start setting up clear goals and intentions, outline research exploration processes so the students could get involved with not only the building type, but (depending on what you emphasized in that project) it also could also be materially based. If the project was a summer camp, it was also a wood construction type, and explored ways to organize building complexes. The students would then focus on a building type AND an organizational type AND a material type. You evaluated them on their capacity to explore explicit ideas and issues. Then, of course, there was the computer. That really impacted what students were able to do, what they’re able to explore, how they could explore it. As administrators, we had to ensure we had the resources we needed to be able to support the technology. That was one of the big things that I really appreciated at the University of Utah. We asked for hundreds of thousands of dollars to network the building so that all our students had computer access. That changed everything because the students could work at their desks, plug in to the computer, the Internet and the world. Looking back, what are your most memorable accomplishments? Besides doing it for 40 years? As an undergraduate, I got interested in Aalto’s architecture. It became the scholarly journey I took throughout my academic career. It expanded to Finland and to the Nordic countries in general. It resulted in numerous articles, lectures, and presentations. When I retired, my wife had Alzheimer’s and I became a caregiver. We traveled internationally for a few years. We went to China in 2014, for three weeks. Just before we left, I got an email from a publisher in the U.K. They said, “We’ve seen your coursework on Scandinavian architecture. Would you be interested in doing a book on Nordic modernism?” I talked to Beverly, and I emailed back, “I’d be glad to.” When I got back, I started doing that book. In 2016, my book on Nordic Modernism came out; it was the culmination of all my research. And as Dean? I was the Chair of a department that was probably over twice the size of the School at that time. The school was probably at the smallest it had been in years. Jeri McIntyre said, “The school’s profile needs to be enhanced. It needs to be blown up and things need to be happening.” I said, “I’m a Dean. If what this place needs is to up its profile, I can do it.” One way was through service. I had been on the ACSA’s Board of Directors. Once here, I was on the National Architectural Accrediting Board of Directors; I did two or three dozen accreditation visits over a four- to five-year period. I chaired NCARB’s Education Committee for two or three years. I chaired AIA’s Educators Practitioners Network. That service work was really important because it very much upped the profile of the school. I also supported my faculty and all the things that they needed to do. In fact, I had to tell one faculty member, “Come in and ask me for money. Don’t go off on a conference without telling me because I’m going to pay your way.” Those are the kind of things that as an administrator I felt were really important. I’m also happy that when I stepped down as Dean, the college had the highest percentage of alumni giving in the University. We established our first development campaign. That changed the profile of the school at the University level. As a result, they didn’t hesitate when we asked to network the building or for funds for salary increases. Were there disappointments? Oh, there probably were, but I’m not sure they were anything really big in hindsight. They may have been at the moment. Part of it was what I learned at Oregon — risk taking. It was a risk to go to graduate school. It was a risk to start teaching. It was a risk to change locations. It was a risk to become a department head. It was a risk to become a dean. Those kinds of things. There were things that would come along every now and then, but I don’t look back at anything that I consider really bad or detrimental. I feel very, very fortunate to have what I consider a fairly good 40-year career. What would you tell newcomers to the field? I think you have to be committed. You have to be engaged, you have to explore, you have to take risks. And you should not be afraid to do things like that. That applies to a lot of stuff, but I think it applies to architecture, simply because it is such a demanding profession and it’s such a demanding educational process. It’s much more complex than it was in 1963 when I started in architecture school. 25
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTg3NDExNQ==