The open jury is one of the most prevalent forms of assessment in design and architecture education worldwide. It is a double-edged sword serving a function of feedback as well as assessment at the same time. Authors like Jeremy Till and Reyner Banham have compared architecture education to a ‘black box,’ a place of ‘conspiracy,’ and ‘secrecy.’ How students exactly learn architecture is not made clear. It is in this environment of mystery that rituals perpetuate and replicate themselves. This chapter looks at the design juries as a breeding ground for creating the perception of ‘who’ an architect is (or ought to be). It draws connections between the ‘ritualistic’ nature of the jury and the culture it propagates. Borrowing indicators of enculturation like constituency, spatiality, choreography, and language, from studies of anthropologist Helena Webster, the chapter highlights the manifestation of these indicators in architecture and design education through the case of open juries at CEPT University, Ahmedabad. In doing so, it situates the indicators in the specificities of the Indian context. The study uses semi-structured interviews with tutors and students (third year and above) to better understand the nature of the jury in conjunction with the perception that underlay the ritual. Through this chapter, the authors hope to pave way for further investigations into more open and equitable teaching and learning environments in architectural and design education.