Abstract

The degree of autonomy available to an individual professor depends upon the nature of the academic programme(s) to which he or she contributes. Some programmes communicate information to students by means of discrete classes, and leave to the students the task of integrating this information into a unified body of knowledge. Most undergraduate programmes in the liberal arts and sciences fall into this category. The primary mechanism for coordinating the teaching activity of faculty members is the curriculum: within its framework, professors enjoy substantial autonomy in the design and provision of their individual classes. In contrast, a second type of academic programme seeks to shape the way students understand and approach the world. Realization of this objective necessitates the development of extensive and complex mechanisms for communication and coordination, and constrains the autonomy of individual professors. The "New Programme" in architecture at the University of Toronto - although of this second type - was without mechanisms capable of producing concerted action and common standards. The problems which plagued the department of architecture for more than a decade and culminated in a recommendation for its closure, are traced to this failure.