The Architects’ Journal Architecture News & Buildings
The poll of more than 600 students reveals how the cost of studying continues to spiral and that the majority of architect hopefuls will be leaving university weighed down with a lifetime of debt – even when they are working significant hours to try and pay their way.
RIBA president Simon Allford said the findings would ‘make for uncomfortable reading, while Charlie Edmonds of the Future Architects Front called the results a ‘grim confirmation of what many of us have known and experienced for years: that architecture is a hostile profession to any but the most privileged’.
A jaw-dropping 70 per cent of all respondents attending UK architecture schools said they expect to owe more than £40,000 by the end of their Part II. This rises to 77 per cent for full-time students in England and Wales (see below).
Advertisement
Worryingly, over a third of full-time students (32 per cent) predicted they would have debts of at least £70,000 by the time they started their Part III. This marks a significant increase on the results from 2018 when just under a fifth (19 per cent) expected to rack up similar amounts of debt.
Many of those surveyed said they had turned to family for financial help. One respondent said: ‘My parents are funding my studies from their savings, for which I am very grateful. However, the money they have set aside will not be enough. The cost of living and tuition fees are vastly more than they anticipated.
‘I will have to work to make up the difference.’
Survey data shows how, for each academic year, students at UK schools are shelling out an average of £24,880, including tuition fees. Those at schools in England and Wales are spending even more – on average £26,262 per annum (see below).
These figures are staggering in total when multiplied by the five years students must study to complete Parts I and II.
As well as the accommodation costs and tuition fees (except for in Scotland) – and in addition to the protracted course length – architecture students spend around £2,200 a year on hidden extras such as model-making, printing and study trips, as well as computers, software and books.
Advertisement
The data reveals that the burgeoning cost of education means more and more full-time students are having to work during term time to supplement their income.
Of those, 43 per cent are working more than 15 hours a week on top of their hours at university. The results – although the number of respondents is smaller – also suggest that BAME students are working even longer hours, with 48 per cent saying they had jobs that took up over 15 hours of their week.
Nor does the survey paint a rosy picture for those in employment. More than two-thirds (68 per cent) in jobs said they were never paid overtime.
Comments from respondents included: ‘I was paid less than minimum wage, which I had to fight to get increased. I am still not paid the living wage, even though they are an RIBA chartered practice.’
Students’ debt worries are also compounded by concern over the low salaries students expect to earn after graduating. As was shown by last year’s annual salary survey (compiled by 9B Careers), a qualified project architect can expect to earn just short of £40,000 once they have passed their Part III. A partner in a practice will receive, on average, around £72,000.
To compare these figures with the pay in other industries, a newly qualified solicitor in London can look forward to earning at least £60,000 and potentially up to £100,000.
As one respondent said: ‘I have student debt from my undergraduate studies that I will probably never be able to pay off given architecture salaries.’
Edmonds of the Future Architects Front told the AJ: ‘Students are burdened with immense costs from software to materials and study trips while simultaneously accumulating a lifetime of debt. To make matters worse, at work they experience overwhelming levels of exploitation in the form of unpaid overtime and wage theft.
‘Particularly in the current context of the cost of living crisis, it is essential that our governing bodies and institutions address the reprehensible conditions that students and workers are subject to in architecture.
‘Without radical change, we will see the profession perpetuate these exclusionary trends and further entrench itself in privilege and social irrelevance.’
Comment
Simon Allford, RIBA president
Many of these statistics make for uncomfortable reading, reconfirming the reality of the pressure and stresses that architectural students face. They paint a picture of financial hardship, with many students undertaking part-time work to support rising living and studying costs and still accruing significant debts.
Findings that indicate students from underrepresented groups seem to be working longer hours each week remains a big concern – and support what we already know about barriers to entry and attrition rates. Strong interest in apprenticeships highlights the urgency of developing alternative routes into the profession.
More affordable, flexible routes to becoming an architect will help ensure that students with the aspiration to join the profession can make positive choices and feel both encouraged and able to qualify. Indeed, on-the-job training could also help to address the education-to-practice knowledge gap, meaning that 'earn and learn' becomes both a financially and educationally attractive and successful pathway.
We know we have to improve access to the profession, which is why we will continue working with the ARB to lobby for new, alternative models of education that break down barriers to entry. Educational reform remains critical to the future of our profession, for architecture and the society we serve.
Kunle Barker, AJ columnist
I look back with nostalgia when I think of my time as a student. In conversation with old University colleagues, we discuss the fun we had and how much we would pay to live just 1 week as a student again. It was an exciting time mainly because we weren't burdened with anything; other than the pursuit of knowledge. They were indeed great days, but I wonder if my children will remember their university days quite as fondly?
In the decades since I graduated from the University of Leeds, the cost of studying has risen significantly. More recent increases in the cost of living have exacerbated the financial pressures faced by all, but for architecture students, these economic pressures are even more significant.
Student loans were introduced at the end of my five years at university. In my final year, the maximum I could borrow was £800 a term, which I did. With no tuition fees and weekly rental in Leeds at around £35, I spent the loan in the student union and visiting my then girlfriend in Granada, Spain. My first job out of university paid £30,000 a year, and I quickly paid off the debt I had racked up.
Worryingly, recent data collected by the Architects Journal highlights the scale of the problem faced by architectural students. When asked, 67 per cent estimate that by the end of their Part II, they will have racked up some £40,000 in debt. An astronomical figure, especially when you consider this is only for part of a qualification. When I say that sickens me, this is not hyperbole. The thought of a student being saddled with the best part of £100,000 of debt on graduation makes me want to vomit.
Architectural students study for seven years and, upon graduation, are thrust into an industry with well-documented low pay levels. High levels of debt and low pay will inevitably make architecture the pursuit of only the wealthy and privileged few; worse still, it will be almost impossible to create an industry that is diverse and inclusive.
Now, of course, some architects are paid well; Starchitects command huge fees, sometimes just for turning up to meetings. I'm not going to name any names, but I find this practice baffling. The problem is a distinct lack of equity in the spread of architectural salaries. It is accepted in all industries that senior and experienced staff members receive higher salaries. However, for some reason, in architecture, the pay gap between those at the top of the food chain and those at the bottom seems like a gaping chasm, a chasm which is incredibly challenging to bridge.
Architects produce work for everybody, so everybody should have the opportunity to be an architect
Financial enrichment is not the sole goal for many, far from it. Still, the combination of high debt upon graduation and low levels of pay within architecture make law, medicine, and banking seem like much more attractive vocations.
So, realistically, what can be done to reduce the financial burden of studying architecture? Well, rents, tuition fees and general living costs are macro problems and lie outside the general influence of the industry.
However, there are some changes that the industry could make to help solve the problem.
1) Reduce the financial burden of study.
This is a very tricky issue as the last thing we want to do is reduce the skill levels of the industry. Reducing the length of study required to become an architect is counterproductive in the long term as we need architects to be well trained. Architectural apprenticeships seem to be a great solution. Many institutions, like the London School of Architecture and London Mets School of Art, Architecture and Design, offer programmes where students can learn and earn. This part-taught, part-apprenticeship programs are becoming more popular among students and educational institutions.
Allowing students to engage in paid work whilst studying will reduce overall debt levels and, in theory, could produce graduates better equipped for the 'real world.
2) Increase wages.
Another tricky issue, as for many practices, wage levels are directly linked to fee levels, so increasing wages would mean increasing fees. However, the reintroduction of a fee scale could increase architectural practices' revenues. In theory, practices will be selected on talent, not on how low they can push their fees. In theory, higher fees will allow practices to pay more, especially young architects. There could also be an industry-wide pay structure which dictates the maximum pay variance between the lowest and highest paid staff within an organisation.
These suggestions may seem overtly socialist or anti-capitalist, but they aren't. Something quite drastic needs to be done before the industry is damaged forever and goes past the point of no return. Architects produce work for everybody, so everybody should at least have the opportunity to be an architect.
And yet the AJ reported only last month an increase in numbers of students – https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/rise-in-number-of-students-accepted-to-study-architecture
Is it me or does all this not exactly add up or does it actually hint that those entering education are not aware of the costs before they register? For the AJ to report both stories in a calendar month suggest the publication would do well to reach out to potential students with a warning?
Let’s be careful about scaremongering here! I agree the unexpected costs of model making, study trips etc are a huge burden that students on other courses don’t have to account for and certainly took a big chunk of my money at university. But let’s also remember that the biggest chunk of debt referred to above is student loan and is very different to other kinds of debt (assuming a UK student who has a standard tuition fee loan from the government). It doesn’t have a negative impact on credit ratings or affect mortgage applications in the same way that any other debt would, and for those who will ‘never pay it off’ (myself likely included), remember it gets written off after 30 years. Perhaps I’m naive, and I certainly wish I didn’t have money going out of my paycheck towards it every month, but that’s the reality of any university degree! Luckily Architecture is starting to offer other options such as apprenticeships and hopefully these will grow to match the demand. We should definitely be pushing for reform, but whilst demand for architectural education is at an all time high (see Paul’s comment), we should be mindful of scaring off promising young students by throwing around big scary numbers without explaining what that debt really means.