Information to Users
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced frommicrofilm the master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in Qpewriter face, while others may be fromany type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and inq^roper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note wiD indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sectionssmall withoverl^s. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are availableany forphotographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Z eeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 3l3.'76l-4700 800.'521-0600 CONSTRUCTING ARCHITECTS; A CRITICAL ETHNOGRAPHY A DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by Carla Corroto, B.Sc., M.Arch., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1996 Dissertation Committee: Approved by L. Richardson T- Curry " j f Adviser K. Schwirian Department of Sociology UMI Number: 9620004 UMI Microform 9620004 Copyright 1996, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Copyright by Carla Corroto 1996 to Scottie 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I express sincere appreciation to Professor Laurel Richardson for her unwavering scholarly, intellectual, and emotional support. She enabled me to successfully determine what I came to Sociology to understand. Without her guidance, this dissertation would not have been possible. Thanks go to the other members of my advisory committee, Professor Kent Schwirian for his unique perspective on all of my work - and for reinforcing the idea that there are multiple ways to define one's direction, and to Professor Timothy Curry for his time, suggestions, and creativeness - he helped me "see" my work in new ways. I can never express enough appreciation to the members of 911! Dissertation Reading Group for helping me construct my path. Gratitude is expressed to (9) Dr. Amber Ault for carefully reading drafts and offering deeply meaningful comments, suggestions and support. Appreciation is offered to (1) Dr. Stephanie Brzuzy for her unique Elvis inspired optimism. To (!) Kim Davies I offer thanks for her assistance that took many forms, all of which were situationally appropriate, especially her sense of humor, housing and coffee. To Dr. Stacy J. Rogers, Betty Kerrigan Winland, Dr. Elizabeth Segal, Dr. Shawn Schwaner, Melinda Otto Corroto, Gail McGuire, Cynthia F. Pelak, Coal and Zoey Corroto, and the 1995 American League Champion Cleveland Indians - I thank you for your willingness to support me in each of your unique and essential ways. Ill VITA November 12, 1958 ......................Born - Youngstown, Ohio 1982 ................................... B.Sc., Architecture .......................................... The Ohio State University 1984 ................................... M.Arch., University of .......................................... Illinois, Chicago 1990 ................................... M.A., Sociology .......................................... The Ohio State University FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Sociology Studies in Architecture IV TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................. ill VITA .............................................. iv CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ............................ 1 II. RESEARCH METHODS ...................... 16 III. ENTERING ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL ......... 2 6 IV. FINISHING THE DEGREE ................. 64 V. GRADUATE SCHOOL ........................ 97 VI. FROM THE OTHER SIDE ................... 135 VII. D I S C U S S I O N .............................. 167 LIST OF REFERENCES .......................... 185 V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION According to a recent report published by the administrators of architecture schools and the American Institute of Architects, architecture-the-profession is becoming "feminized" (ACSA News, 1994a). Something quite short of the "feminization of architecture," I would merely call the profession less occupationally segregated as it undergoes a modification in its sex composition. Women constitute 10.63% of the total architectural work force - which translates into 10 times more women practicing architecture today than in 1970 (AIA Firm Reports, 1994). In addition, the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture report that in 1994, women earned 27% of the master's degrees in architecture and that one quarter of the students entering undergraduate architecture schools were women (ACSA News, 1994b). While it may appear that women are making what would be their initial inroad into architecture, the proportion of women to men conspicuously lags behind other traditionally male- dominated professions (Benokraitis and Feagin, 1995; MacCorquodale and Jensen, 1989; Reskin, 1994). Further, research indicates that women are much less likely to persist in the profession of architecture than are men (Corroto, 1990; Vytlacil, 1989) and that their influence at the policy/design/theory 2 producing level (the elite level) is virtually non-existent (Scott-Brown, 1989; Busserl, 1995). The following ethnographic research began with the sociological question, "Why are there (relatively) so few women in architecture?" Subsequently, I chose to be particularly attentive to the ideological components of architectural training that are exercised as social control, simultaneously deterring women's full participation and reproducing men's privileged status within the field. This directed analysis illuminates the relationship between how architects construct students and teach them architects' "ways of knowing," and construct a corresponding culture that underpins professional practice. Because of the topic - women and architecture - this research is unique. There is an abundance of sociological research that is descriptive, critical, and feminist in nature about the circumstance of women in such male domains as medicine, academics, law, science, and art, (e.g. Epstein, 1981; Harding, 1986; Mohrmann, 1995; Statham, Richardson and Cook, 1991) but little has been written by and about women who are educated as designers of our built environment. Architecture blends the science of engineering, the creative world of art, and the business that directs the construction industry. Thus, this study will have a variety of implications and application for gender equality research in an increasingly interconnected and multi-faceted work place. There are documented problems of adjustment when women enter any occupation that is traditionally male-dominated 3 (Kanter, 1977) . While many studies of tokenism situate their policy recommendations and measure progress by simply counting the increased number of women in the ranks as success, my research, exercised as a critical feminist ethnography, challenges the very nature of architecture's hierarchical and exclusive relationships (e.g. Zimmer, 1988; Blum and Smith, 1988). By choosing to study the discursive practices that constitute the taken-for-granted dominance of one form of knowledge over another, and one set of values over all others, I may more readily reveal the daily negotiated relationships of power and dominance that both structurally and informally act as barriers to women's persistence as architects. With this research I intended to ascertain if the few women who are marginally successful at assimilating, unwittingly reproduce the normative values of the culture of architecture that generally operate toward exclusion. In general, architectural discourse is highly critical, analytical, and theoretically dense (Frampton, 1993). However, as a profession architecture is reluctant to criticize the ideological components that constitute its normative knowledge and its criteria for measuring worth (Ghirardo, 1991) . Choosing instead to examine intensively only the products of their labor (drawings and buildings) has, to date, successfully erased challenges to the dominant paradigms that maintain architecture's exclusive sex and social class composition. 4 LITERATURE REVIEW Indeed, there is a legacy of sexism as historically women's entrance into the profession has been limited (Anderson, 1989; Vytlacil, 1989). What follows is a brief overview of women's recent past in architecture, reflecting upon how that history situated and informed women's position in the profession today and a review of the sociological literature that explicates the experience of women positioned as tokens in male- dominated and defined organizations. Women's Access to Architecture Although women are and have been involved