Are UTSOA's Values IN LINE With UT's?

what starts here should change the world

Do we really want to compete with the GSD? Is that the gold standard? Are Harvard-educated architects doing the best work, the kind of work to which we should aspire? If so then it would follow that the world needs more Harvard-educated architects, and that the only tragedy is we can't all go to Harvard. If not, UTSoA should define itself by other terms, and with more clarity. A "top-tier design" school, which is simply coded language for not-quite-Harvard, doesn't cut it. 

The thing is,  I think UTSoA can do better than Harvard—which seems primarily geared toward generating attention within the profession--because architecture can be so much more potent, and generate so much more value, when it relinquishes this embarrassingly vain preoccupation. The point is the criteria of high-design remains baked into the hegemony of the institution; and while we have paid lip-service to new values the pedagogy still incentives inefficient and outmoded methods that are focused primarily on generating and representing forms. 

We can do better than form. We can do better than good design.  What starts here should change the world. Is it?

*