NOMA Report 2007

On GSD Minority Recruiting (DRAFT): 11/25/2007

The following assessment and recommendations are informed by two events attended by GSD minority students: the National Organization of Minority Architects (NOMA) annual conference and the Harvard-wide graduate school fair at Morehouse College.

Five GSD students attended the National Organization of Minority Architects (NOMA) annual conference October 2527, 2007 in Orlando, FL. Attendance serves two interrelated purposes: on one hand to reaffirm that black and Hispanic students at the GSD are part of the NOMA community, and on the other hand to boost awareness of the GSD within this community. Ideally this “showing up” each year will ultimately translate to more successful applications to GSD from underrepresented minorities. (Dk Osseo-Asare also attended a Harvard-wide graduate school fair at Morehouse College on October 29.)

This year GSD students gave a brief presentation to NOMAS, the national body of student NOMA chapters, on (the importance of) graduate education. That conversation included GSD students talking about their own paths to the GSD: Temple Simpson completed an AB in Chemistry before starting MArch I at GSD; Laura Shipman received a Cornell BArch prior to the GSD’s MAUD program; Quilian Riano and Jonathan Evans received BDes and BA degrees in Architecture from UF and UVA respectively, before entering the GSD as MArch I AP candidates. All four worked for a number of years between undergrad and grad school.

At the outset, our main goal was to determine the relative proportion of BA versus BArch students within NOMAS. Such a distinction could explain in part the low volume of applications to GSD from underrepresented minorities. Our thinking was that whereas BArch students would be less likely, after five years of architectural education, to prioritize the highly competitive MArch II program over beginning IDP and full-time work experience, BA students who place high value on becoming a licensed architect or working for top tier firms would be more likely to apply to the MArch I program.

We asked the 100-odd students at the NOMAS meeting: “How many of you are in grad school?” The show of hands was roughly 60 percent; the majority of students are in 4+2 programs. This demonstrates the problematic of minority under-representation at the GSD. Students in 4+2 programs have two options when considering applying to the GSD. One option is to enter an MArch I program after completing their bachelors degree. Talking to students, this was not an attractive option because in students’ minds, it essentially “devalues” their undergraduate education. After four years studying architecture, they are being asked to sign up for another four years. The second option is to finish their Master’s degree and then seek a postprofessional degree such as MAUD or MArch II. This option appeals only to students who have a specific desire for advanced study or expanded scope of expertise. Given that the majority of NOMAS members cite registration as a fundamental career goal, graduate education at the GSD is not a big draw, particular in light of the associated debt burden.

In the case of both options listed above, choosing to attend the GSD translates a 4+2 track into a 4+4 scenario.

Considering the typical cost of a two-year masters against a four year program at the GSD (or completing the original 4+2 program followed by +2 at the GSD) there is little incentive to attend the GSD. Clearly the GSD provides more opportunity to enter the world of “Starchitecture,” but prospective students are rational enough to examine opportunities in economic terms: will a GSD education justify (pay for) the significant addition of time and money expenditure required; does any mathematics of assurance exist (i.e. statistics that show markedly higher starting salaries for GSD graduates)?

2008 NOMA Conference: The 2008 conference will be held in Washington, DC. NOMA has a long-term relationship with Howard University and the conference chair is a DC-based NOMA board member. The in-coming president of the AIA is black, and at this year's session pledged to support next year's conference. Needless to say, the 2008 conference will likely be unprecedented; Harvard should be there in an official capacity.

Reinvent the "Product Fair": Each year the NOMA conference includes a "Product Fair." It could be very strategic for the GSD to officially enter this event space, which is seen by all conference attendees over two days. This is the ideal venue to present materials on the GSD, to field questions, and to reaffirm the GSD's commitment to minority recruiting.

In addition, many African-American faculty attend the NOMA conference and a Harvard presence would serve as a unique networking platform (several faculty in attendance were GSD alumni). Similarly, minority recruiting remains a challenge for the Loeb Fellowship as well, which could benefit from NOMA-wide outreach.

General Recommendations: 1. Increase financial aid for underrepresented minorities. If the GSD is actually serious about addressing the diversity problem, more aid is both an imperative and a highly effective recruitment tool.

In the case of MIT, aggressive funding two decades ago transformed the demographics of engineering not just at MIT but nation-wide. Today MIT has a similar policy in place for minority MArch candidates (free tuition).

UVA is starting to roll-out a similar model, and the seductive nature of Princeton’s aid package speaks for itself.

Financial aid is a critical incentive for almost all graduate students, even more so among black and Hispanic applicant pools.

2. Focus on recruiting minority students who do not come from undergraduate architecture programs.

This could serve to complement the trickle of applicants having undergraduate degrees in architecture. Also, non-architecture students are less likely to share the reservations of their peers with undergrad degrees in architecture- namely, that spending four years to do what they have already spent four years learning is a waste of time and money.

The GSD should develop a sexy “sales brochure” for the school. At present the course catalog is supposed to do this job. However, the other graduate and professional schools in attendance at the the Morehouse grad school fair had a type of literature that explained the school in a more focused, abbreviated way. Such brochures featured information like what types of jobs graduates take (KSG), emphasis on opportunities for interdisciplinary coursework across Harvard University (HBS), etc.

It seems that to a certain extent the GSD relies on “word-of-mouth” to draw prospective students; that works to a point, but if the School wants to increase minority representation, particularly students without architecture backgrounds, a more targeted approach to recruiting may be necessary or at least an important parallel tactic.

3. Continue to expand the GSD’s network of relationships with specific programs at other schools. The GSD clearly has strong working relationships with certain schools and undergraduate architecture programs (for ex., feeder schools to the MArch I AP track, such as UF, UVA, UMich). Morehouse has an Urban Studies program, and is beginning an Urban Planning major. Such programs need to be drawn into the galaxy of GSD recruiting, in order for professors to think to suggest top students apply to GSD. For students outside the bubble of certain elite schools (or even within), a professor’s encouragement is often instrumental in taking a step as bold as saying, “I can go to Harvard.”

The GSD needs to more effectively showcase how programs at the GSD extend or expand the scope of undergraduate studies with a bias toward academic research or professional expertise--for example, highlighting how the coursework of an MAUD degree extends an undergraduate education in Architecture.

4. Expand SoCA’s Design Initiative for Youth (DIY), a Saturday school introducing 8th grade students from Boston to architecture, landscape architecture and urban planning. Consider the precedent of Cooper Union’s Saturday program for high school students, which to a certain extent is a feeder for the school itself. At present DIY is a partnership between SoCA (Social Change and Activism, a GSD student group) and Citizens’ School’s 8th Grade Academy, taught for 10 weeks each Fall and Spring semester. Building the DIY curriculum to include a more advanced track for high school students could be the beginning of a more coherent (proactive) development component of GSD minority recruiting—linking high school programming with publicized minority scholarships to Career Discovery. Again, consider the case of MIT’s MITES program (Minorities in Technology, Engineering, Entrepreneurship and Science), a free six-week summer program for African-American, Hispanic and Native American high school students (cited in last year’s NOMA report).

If the GSD is serious about emerging as a leader in pushing its multicultural learning environment to more closely represent the American cultural landscape, a good first step and sound investment is to support the GSD students who take time out of their overwhelming schedules to teach underprivileged 8th graders from Boston communities like Roxbury and Dorchester, a student effort to foster new generations of diversity in design.

5. Toshiko Mori has expressed support for both scholarships for qualified underrepresented minority applicants to Career Discovery, and programs to introduce high school students to architecture, specifically. At present she is exploring opportunities to target Harlem youth, in partnership with the Studio Museum of Harlem, and inter-school dialog with Tuskegee University's architecture program. It certainly makes sense to coordinate such efforts with any similar initiatives undertaken by GSD admissions office.

6. Is there a "diversity committee" or "task force on underrepresented minorities" at the GSD? Harvard is sometimes squeamish about such explicit language. However, at this point, with at average a single black student entering each MArch I class--in the year 2007--it is probably time to launch a more aggressive strategy for minority recruitment. For example, after last year's post-NOMA discussion, everyone seemed open or even enthusiastic about the idea of offering scholarships for top minority applicants to Career Discovery (again, consider how many MArch I candidates are Career Discovery alumni--this is the simplest and most straightforward method for increasing minority enrollment at GSD). There was some debate over whether or not it made sense to make this information public, as opposed to keeping it an internal prerogative. Some of us argued that letting people know about such opportunities on a very wide and public basis is hugely important in attracting applicants and recasting the GSD's reputation as unaffordable. A year later, nothing seems to have happened in this regard. A committee or task force, consisting of students, faculty and administrative leaders, could provide a structure for an action-oriented timeline moving forward.

Summary: It is worth noting that the GSD has less black and Hispanic students than it had 10 or even 20 years ago; this is a serious problem. On one hand, why is the GSD not attracting more black undergrads from Yale and Princeton, students who in theory should be more likely to apply to or enroll at GSD? Why is there an almost complete failure in recruiting students from "off the GSD's map," for example students from Morehouse?

The GSD needs a better sales pitch. There are definitely attendees at NOMA's annual conference who could succeed at the GSD--but why would they opt to commit the time and money required to attend the GSD? A central issue is identifying and presenting the value of a graduate education at the GSD. Perhaps the GSD's leadership may not necessarily be in getting more designers into the profession per se, but getting more minority designers into academia.

Such a transformative process--which would have profound effects in the long-term--needs to begin among GSD faculty. Most immediately, a committee should be formed with the express goal of addressing underrepresentation, exploring the potential of financial aid, Career Discovery, a DIY-type feeder program expanded to include high school students, and expanded institutional networks for minority recruiting.

Sincerely, Jonathan Evans, MArch I AP Dk Osseo-Asare, MArch I Quilian Riano, MArch I AP Laura Shipman, MAUD Temple Simpson, MArch I