Architecture Degree Programs

kennedy

kennedy

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
2,820
Reaction score
7
Had questions on degree programs, and I know I can ask my counselor, but if anyone here is in the field and has actually gone through school, I'd like to know what your thoughts are.

Am I better off doing a:

5-year Master of Architecture program, continuing to the (dreaming Harvard GSD) M.Arch II program?

or

4-year Bachelor of the Arts in Architectural Studies program, continuing to the (dreaming Harvard GSD) M.Arch I program?

Thanks for any insight.
 
Addendum:

I understand that you can't know what's "better for me" because there's way too many variables on what's good. But, in general, which leads to the most successful architects in the field? Which path do most architects take?
 
For what Architects are compensated, you would be wise to choose the shortest and cheapest program you can. DO NOT pay for a Master's Degree unless you have your heart set on teaching. Get the bare minimum formal education for what you want to do (in most cases, a BS in Arch. will do).
EXCEPTION-If you are a scary talented designer, disregard the above and go for the big degree. If you are like 90% of people in the profession, you will always do production work and will learn far more on the job.
 
One cannot become licensed with a B.S. in Arch.

A B.S. IS A WORTHLESS PIECE OF PAPER, unless you like being someone's drafting slave the rest of your life.

You either go for BArch or try to make your way to MArch in a 4+2 or 5+1 step.

Cheap schools are at a SEVERE disadvantage at getting hired at top tier, or even respectable firms. Schools introduce you to many companies through faculty and visiting members of firms. If one doesn't go to a respected school, their opportunities become very limited.

Internships matter greatly in the beginning as well. The better internships one has available the better one's chances of having a career which actually amounts to something.

Talent does matter, but connections and networking matter more. Why do you think there are so many famous lousy architects working at top firms? They got there meeting and knowing people. Meanwhile otherwise vastly more talented people are stuck drawing toilet partitions in the bowels of no name firms.

EDIT: I might add, practice sketching night and day. In mere moments being able to illustrate, and test, your ideas or document existing conditions on the fly, with only the most basic of tools, will get you places.
 
I'm going to agree with Lurker and say B.S. is just not enough. I suggest NEU out of bias and other reason to get a B.S. and a Masters. Their co-op training can get you hands on training with architect firms and give you a boost in your resume.
 
Arch101 said:
For what Architects are compensated, you would be wise to choose the shortest and cheapest program you can.
Click to expand...
That kind of thinking will make you a lifelong peon. The only place worth being in architecture is in its aristocracy.

This is by no means guaranteed by a master?s degree from a top school ?just as attending an Ivy League school doesn?t guarantee you?ll be elected President-- but you might look at who?s been elected recently, and you might check Wiki to find out where your architectural heroes went and the degrees they got. Look up: Norman Foster, Robert A.M. Stern, Richard Rogers, Frank Gehry, Charles Gwathmey, Michael Graves, Rem Koolhaas, Richard Meier, Robert Venturi, Demetri Porphyrios, I.M. Pei, Robert Campbell?

For every one of these guys, 5000 stiffs graduated the same schools with the same degrees and are doing formulaic churches and crummy shopping centers in the suburbs or ?worse?backstabbing their way to the number 4, 3, or 2 spot in a big firm. So there are no guarantees if you take their path. But you?ll also find precious few top-rank architect who didn?t.

DO NOT pay for a Master's Degree unless you have your heart set on teaching.
Click to expand...
This is bad advice. Get a Master?s degree if you can. Two reasons:

1. The most sophisticated architectural concepts are bandied about in architecture programs, and you basically need to be an intellectual if you want to be in the architectural elite enumerated above.

2. When the economy goes south --as it has recently?architectural work dries up. If you?re an employee, you get laid off and if you?re self-employed you have to close your office. That?s when it?s good to be able to get a teaching job. I weathered the last two recessions by teaching. I had to commute from Charlotte to Rhode Island, but I survived. Would you rather be teaching or in the unemployment line?

Get the bare minimum formal education for what you want to do (in most cases, a BS in Arch. will do).
Click to expand...
This is even worse advice. Less education is never good, and more education rarely bad. Education gives you a competitive advantage wherever you find yourself.

Btw, in my state, a BS in Arch. Doesn?t even qualify you to sit for the exam.

If you are a scary talented designer ? go for the big degree.
Click to expand...
Yes.

If you are like 90% of people in the profession, you will always do production work and will learn far more on the job.
Click to expand...
True, and if you?re like 99% of aspiring actors, you?ll be waiting tables.

It's true that production work is learned on the job. After you've learned it (three years), the rest of your career should be spent avoiding it.

Go for the brass ring, kennedy.
 
I appreciate your optimism, ABLARC. However, for the past 2 decades I have worked in a few of the biggest offices in the city. Too many times I have observed talented and intelligent people with Master's Degrees and Licenses spending part of their days laboring over the same cad crap that the lowliest serf does. I have also heard tales of woe from many staffers of considerable experience who wished they hadn't become so indebted to their education if "they had only known" what their careers would actually be like. Production work is 80% of the profession. The chances of being one of the designers is about the same as landing a pro sports deal. This profession is awash with unhappy, underpaid, underappreciated people. Truly gifted and talented people SHOULD be encouraged to be as well trained and prepared as they can. But the rest (the majority) shouldn't be forced or goaded into spending exorbitantly on an education which won't do them much good as production personnel, where most will end up.
 
Arch101 said:
I appreciate your optimism, ABLARC. However, for the past 2 decades I have worked in a few of the biggest offices in the city. Too many times I have observed talented and intelligent people with Master's Degrees and Licenses spending part of their days laboring over the same cad crap that the lowliest serf does. I have also heard tales of woe from many staffers of considerable experience who wished they hadn't become so indebted to their education if "they had only known" what their careers would actually be like. Production work is 80% of the profession. The chances of being one of the designers is about the same as landing a pro sports deal. This profession is awash with unhappy, underpaid, underappreciated people. Truly gifted and talented people SHOULD be encouraged to be as well trained and prepared as they can. But the rest (the majority) shouldn't be forced or goaded into spending exorbitantly on an education which won't do them much good as production personnel, where most will end up.
Click to expand...

You will not be truly talented or gifted if you do the bare minimum. You will NOT make it to the top of the architecture world with a B.S. Period.
 
Arch 101, you sound like you're trapped. I'm sure kennedy doesn't want to join you.
 
I appreciate your optimism, ABLARC. However, for the past 2 decades I have worked in a few of the biggest offices in the city. Too many times I have observed talented and intelligent people with Master's Degrees and Licenses spending part of their days laboring over the same cad crap that the lowliest serf does. I have also heard tales of woe from many staffers of considerable experience who wished they hadn't become so indebted to their education if "they had only known" what their careers would actually be like. Production work is 80% of the profession. The chances of being one of the designers is about the same as landing a pro sports deal. This profession is awash with unhappy, underpaid, underappreciated people. Truly gifted and talented people SHOULD be encouraged to be as well trained and prepared as they can. But the rest (the majority) shouldn't be forced or goaded into spending exorbitantly on an education which won't do them much good as production personnel, where most will end up.
Click to expand...

All this says is that people with higher educations do not necessarily rise to the top of the profession. It doesn't suggest that you can with a "bare minimum" education. In other words, a higher degree from a good school is not sufficient to be a great architect, but it is necessary.

PS: I have it from some recent admits at GSD that the job market for urban planners is better than expected right now, if that's at all a consideration.
 
Well, first thanks for all the advice. I was hoping for maybe one or two responses.

Arch 101: I can certainly understand what you're saying, but I know that I'm able to think, conceptualize, and draw better than most others my age. How many other high-school students do you know that check, if not post, each day on an architectural forum (I think there's a few others here)? I'm young, I might as well try to be the next Starchitect before I become too cynical.

Ablarc: You're route seems like the glory road. The one I want to follow. Hopefully, that'll work out for me and I'll grab the brass ring.

Anyone else: KU (most likely choice for undergrad) offers a 5+ year M.Arch I. If things go to plan, I'll get the in-state tuition, get my M.Arch, and from there decide to go on to an M.Arch II. Hopefully, going to the GSD for a post-pro degree will allow me to network, as was mentioned. And if the GSD isn't in my fortune cookie, well I already have a Masters from a (decently) respected university.
 
And at KentXie: I'll almost definitely apply to NEU, however, it's fairly (extremely, compared to KU) expensive and I've got siblings going to school eventually. I can't use up all the money! Hopefully the Financial Aid office is kind.
 
Arch101 said:
I appreciate your optimism, ABLARC. However, for the past 2 decades I have worked in a few of the biggest offices in the city. Too many times I have observed talented and intelligent people with Master's Degrees and Licenses spending part of their days laboring over the same cad crap that the lowliest serf does. I have also heard tales of woe from many staffers of considerable experience who wished they hadn't become so indebted to their education if "they had only known" what their careers would actually be like. Production work is 80% of the profession. The chances of being one of the designers is about the same as landing a pro sports deal. This profession is awash with unhappy, underpaid, underappreciated people. Truly gifted and talented people SHOULD be encouraged to be as well trained and prepared as they can. But the rest (the majority) shouldn't be forced or goaded into spending exorbitantly on an education which won't do them much good as production personnel, where most will end up.
Click to expand...

Big corporate offices, such as SOM, at notorious for pigeon holing people. Most of the best firms are mid sized where the distance between the hiring partners and the lowliest intern is not so great such that they never meet. If one is at an interview where some member of the senior staff isn't conducting the interview, or doesn't at least pop in for five minutes to meet, usually that means your chattle to that company.

If a person is unhappy at a bloated, badly managed, uber firm which doesn't appreciate them, then it's time to quit. Having the 'name' on a resume often allows those highly talented and underappreciated personnel to become stars at other mid level firms. They might not be nationally or world famous, but within a city or region the reputation is respected and the work brings with it some satisfying appreciation.

Shortchanging oneself with a cheap education will cripple one's professional opportunities for life. The chances of having a meaningful and fulfilling career are so much better with a degree which carries some weight. A bad degree is a fairly certain path to misery, good degree doesn't necessarily equate to success, but it does offer a much better chance.
 
So this is not specifically about architectural degrees, but rather the chance I received to meet with Nader Tehrani of Office dA. I'm going to be able to ask him (and others in the office) some questions. Here's my list so far, if you've got any you think I should add, please post them. I'll also bring my camera, and if I'm allowed I'll snap some shots of anything that looks pertinent to the forum.

1. At Office dA and other firms, how does the creative process work? How are most of your projects began? Typically, do clients find you, or do you find them?

2. How did you (Mr. Tehrani) know you wanted to be an architect? When did you know? Now that you're in the business, is the job what you hoped it would be? How long did it take you to become a principal?

3. How important is architectural style at dA? Do you try to stick with a consistent style through all of your projects, or do you tailor the style to an individual client?

4. What is your favorite part of being an architect? Least favorite?

5. What was the most valuable part of your education? When, where, and what did you learn that has had an impact on your career?

6. When you sketch, do you always sketch buildings or architecture? What do you do, or what did you do to enhance your drawing and overall architectural skills?

7. Where do you believe talent comes from? When and how does inspiration come for you? When you imagine a space, does it come together bit by bit, or in one big rush? Are you able to come up with comprehensive ideas about a building on demand, or do you start with a rougher concept, and gradually smooth it out in your mind?

8. What kind of advice to you typically give to students interested in pursuing architecture? Specifically, cautions and warnings?
 
Kennedy, if you go the MArch I route I would suggest looking into other undergraduate degree programs than architectural studies, as hard as that is to think about as a teenager who wants to be an architect. The +3 program is amazing in that allows one to cultivate and adapt other specialties and interests to architecture, and that sort of cross-pollenization can and does breed incredibly innovative thinking and practices. The end result is an architect with a much more developed and broad net of thinking and influence. You could study art history, physics, ecology, philosophy, industrial design, urban studies, economics.... the list is endless.

Maybe ask Nader for input on this, or speak with MArch I / MArch II grads at OdA when you visit....
 
As I narrow my decision, it looks more and more like KU will be my number one choice, simply due to finances. As an architecture student coming from Missouri, KU offers in-state tuition. That, combined with the ability to get a M.Arch 1 in 5 years, makes it a very good choice for me. Certainly, though, I would like to take classes in other areas, perhaps double major or do a minor in something else. My high school schedule shows that, I have or am taking Art History, Art Studio, US History, US and Comparative Gov't, European History, and Language and Composition as APs.

One of the reasons I personally want to study architecture is to design buildings and communities with the highest level of connectedness and space for innovation. Infrastructure will certainly change very much in the coming century, and we all know how much of a hassle it is now to retrofit buildings and street grids due to short-sighted practices. Perhaps a course in computer technology? Engineering? I do really like physics...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top