Anyone have an insight on the comparison between the Bartlett's MArch2 program versus AA's DRL?
thomas201989
Jul 18, 14 5:41 am
I'm currently studying on the professional masters course at one of these institutions. I was interviewed and accepted by both and I have friends on both the DRL and March 2 courses.
The DRL was founded by Patrik Schumacher and Brett Steele and fairly widely recognised within the profession (at least in London) as the Zaha Hadid training camp, so you'll probably learn MAYA and go work for them. The course is 16 years old and well established with good structure.
The MArch 2 is a very young course and bit disorganised still but the teaching staff are much more impressive. Thanks to Peter Cook and Marco Cruz who have brought a plethora of world renowned academics and professionals to the Bartlett. I have heard from a student that she feels employability isn't as good as DRL, saying that, she is employed by a famous architecture practice and the Bartlett has just been voted by the AJ's poll of the top 100 UK practices as having the most employable graduates for the 11th successive year (the AA came 3rd again)
Academically the schools have different ethos's, the AA is much more process based and the Bartlett is much more outcome based (I'm paraphrasing from conversations with tutors from both schools). It is possible to study for 1.5 years and never conclude your research at the DRL (I have seen this first hand from friends work) whereas at the MArch2 there is always a final product (again seen first hand). Neither approach is better, it just depends on what type of designer you are.
So to conclude the Bartlett is the better school as a whole at the moment but the DRL is the more established course when compared to the MArch 2. Employability at both schools is good but the DRL is more localized. Teaching is approached differently at both schools with equally impressive results.
We're splitting hairs here, but very important hairs.
TED
Jul 18, 14 5:48 pm
AA, Hands down. I have gone to both schools. Sorry, no comparison.
Beware: once someone says the strength of 'A' over 'B' is employability - runs like your being chased by a skunk.
Yes, agree. Bartlett is a finishing school.
You make your employability - not your Uni.
thomas201989
Jul 25, 14 4:47 am
@TED Actually I wasn't implying that the Bartlett is a finishing school. If anything both non professional courses are finishing schools
However I agree with your comments re employability
Why AA hands down? Is that your opinion of both schools as a whole or particularly to the March 2 and DRL courses?
thomas201989
Jul 25, 14 4:52 am
@Kyle Onaga Actually as an aside are you referring to the B-Pro or the RIBA Part 2 Masters at the Bartlett
TED
Jul 26, 14 4:02 pm
The AA is rich with anything and everything going on all day -- Bartlett is structured like a UK course where they move you through a set programme - in the end it's personal taste - if you have an agenda - AA much more adaptable and better resourced so that can happen-
Staff often teach at both schools and many ex-bartlett students teach at the AA
Anyone have an insight on the comparison between the Bartlett's MArch2 program versus AA's DRL?
I'm currently studying on the professional masters course at one of these institutions. I was interviewed and accepted by both and I have friends on both the DRL and March 2 courses.
The DRL was founded by Patrik Schumacher and Brett Steele and fairly widely recognised within the profession (at least in London) as the Zaha Hadid training camp, so you'll probably learn MAYA and go work for them. The course is 16 years old and well established with good structure.
The MArch 2 is a very young course and bit disorganised still but the teaching staff are much more impressive. Thanks to Peter Cook and Marco Cruz who have brought a plethora of world renowned academics and professionals to the Bartlett. I have heard from a student that she feels employability isn't as good as DRL, saying that, she is employed by a famous architecture practice and the Bartlett has just been voted by the AJ's poll of the top 100 UK practices as having the most employable graduates for the 11th successive year (the AA came 3rd again)
Academically the schools have different ethos's, the AA is much more process based and the Bartlett is much more outcome based (I'm paraphrasing from conversations with tutors from both schools). It is possible to study for 1.5 years and never conclude your research at the DRL (I have seen this first hand from friends work) whereas at the MArch2 there is always a final product (again seen first hand). Neither approach is better, it just depends on what type of designer you are.
So to conclude the Bartlett is the better school as a whole at the moment but the DRL is the more established course when compared to the MArch 2. Employability at both schools is good but the DRL is more localized. Teaching is approached differently at both schools with equally impressive results.
We're splitting hairs here, but very important hairs.
AA, Hands down. I have gone to both schools. Sorry, no comparison.
Beware: once someone says the strength of 'A' over 'B' is employability - runs like your being chased by a skunk.
Yes, agree. Bartlett is a finishing school.
You make your employability - not your Uni.
@TED Actually I wasn't implying that the Bartlett is a finishing school. If anything both non professional courses are finishing schools
However I agree with your comments re employability
Why AA hands down? Is that your opinion of both schools as a whole or particularly to the March 2 and DRL courses?
@Kyle Onaga Actually as an aside are you referring to the B-Pro or the RIBA Part 2 Masters at the Bartlett
The AA is rich with anything and everything going on all day -- Bartlett is structured like a UK course where they move you through a set programme - in the end it's personal taste - if you have an agenda - AA much more adaptable and better resourced so that can happen-
Staff often teach at both schools and many ex-bartlett students teach at the AA