Still fresh dipemberitaan about feature on Brexit. Interesting to read how the United Kingdom (UK) ‘dying’ out of the zone of the European Union (EU). In fact, if examined, not entirely well in fact the UK is affiliated with the EU. Example (easy) as it still uses the pound sterling and the entry of the UK as a member of the Schengen so that those of you who want to ‘Europe’, throw away the dream apply for a Schengen visa, can stop by all to the UK.
The most recent is pulled sound condition among the people who want the UK itself out (leave) and who still want to live (Werner). Visible noise ‘leave’ more voiced by nationalist circles periphery, while the sound of ‘Werner’ more than those living in urban areas, especially cities with multi-national composition of the community. The main factor of noise ‘leave’ is uncovered is monotonous and static development of the UK over the years. Being in the shadow of the EU to make economic globalization dominant ripple lumpy only felt in urban areas, only for those who are smart and have an interest. Of course, this phenomenon makes EU leaders scrambling for the future, may appear like a domino effect Frexit, Nexit, Italeave and so on.
Well, look in the mirror Brexit, I want to relate this to the phenomenon of Engineering Profession Program (PPI) fronted PII and Architect Profession Program (PPARs) by IAI is currently being raged formulated.
As we know, in order to meet the demands of engineers who are still deficits, and by the standards of competence of our engineers in order to compete in the MEA, the PPI was launched in several universities (Menristekdikti). Be thankful for, the UB also happiness quota to facilitate this program.
However mustinya should be given clear signs between the PPI and the Architecture Department of the opportunity to develop the competencies of candidates architect by PPARs. “Filling the deficit” is a word that is strongly associated with the demand, and its implications on the velocity of tuition. Most of the policy of opening new study programs certainly consider it. Some courses Architecture ‘major’ first ventured to open the program PPARs with the mirror of similar programs outside (Ka’b, Naab etc.), also wants to meet the demand. Fortunately for the architecture department that has been under the auspices of the ‘name’ of the Faculty of Engineering and Planning, or even become the School of Architecture. Policies can be more focused and flexible to immediately put into action.
Their PPI of course be a big question mark over the fate of the architecture department PPARs are still under the auspices of the faculty of engineering in the future. It may be that this program is just a dream given how mengguritanya number of engineers compared to the number of architects (on campus). Yet it is clear the difference between the program and the program profession Engineers Architects profession, as agreed by top officials PII and IAI. More can be seen from the documents uploaded by Aptari here (http://aptari.org/penjelasan-posisi-kelembagaan-pengembangan-profesi-arsitek/). Studying this document, it is apparent already clear line distinguishing between the Engineers and Architects, as well as the consequences to their respective curricula.
Why does this need to be reaffirmed? Because as they had done before, the image of our education is less adaptable to rapid change. Policies that are made today has big implications later in life. Laden with conflicts of interest. If not confirmed such limits, could be biased at a later date. That there is a profession architect remains in the shadow of the competence of engineers who incidentally was also still a ‘general’ for some other professional institutions in it given the broad field of engineering that is so wide nan. Good competence is competence to understand properly how to position ourselves as operator and regulator to manage the system that gave birth to strong in the field of human resources. Not just filling a gap to exploit demand, and ironically slowly sterilize the potential of each role.
Do not be surprised, maybe later later Ars-XIT phenomena can emerge as Brexit today. Not as a form (provocation) distrust of the system, but as a process (proaksi) learning that if you want to go forward, the focus becomes important in building the nation’s capital.
Hopefully we can soon necessitates PPARs UB. If not now when.
Vienna, 21 Ramadhan 1437 H
Yusfan A. Yusran