I'm having trouble deciding whether to do the M.arch program (for non architectural background) straight after undergrad or taking a gap year (or two). Is it beneficial to work before and gain some real world experience? I don't want to get burnt out but also am thinking that it may be good to go ahead and start my career. Any advice?
Thanks!
curtkram
Aug 26, 14 4:03 pm
if you have a position available, it might help to work for a year to meet people that can help you land a job once you get out. it will also give you exposure to the profession you wouldn't get by staying in school.
ArchNyen
Aug 26, 14 6:25 pm
study abroad
KaylaF
Sep 1, 14 4:17 am
So your first degree is not in architecture? In general I think there is tremendous benefit in getting some real life experience and being able to reflect back on that when returning to school. However, if you are very keen to get started in architecture and aren't able to get a job in the field because of your current education, you may wish to continue straight on. It's really a personal choice about what you think will be best for your personal growth and development and your aims.
ARCHCareersGuide.com
Sep 6, 14 7:24 am
This is always the million dollar question - go straight through or take a year or two between.
First, I would apply to programs and plan to pursue the degree directly after your program because you can always decide later to not go if admitted. Next spring, you cannot apply to programs after the deadline if you do not have a position.
Normally, I would suggest you work between degrees to broaden your exposure to the profession, discipline, but can you find employment? What is your UG degree?
Remember, that most graduate programs for those with a degree in another discipline may be 3-4 years -- taking a year or two in between may be a nice diversion if you can afford it.
Best
@DocArchitecture
ewn1626
Oct 16, 14 2:43 pm
Thank you all for your advice!
My undergrad is in economics and if I took a year off, I was thinking about teaching English abroad.
bugsmetoo
Oct 16, 14 7:13 pm
And what would teaching English abroad do to further your pursuit of architecture?
Oct 16, 14 7:35 pm
ewn1626,
Maybe consider how you apply your economics education into the business end of architecture. Considering economics would be related to a business administration but more focused on the math end of finacial accounting, you still have your business fundamentals embedded in the materials you would have been studying out of. Many architects are total sh-theads when it comes to money and economics. Your economics background can help you design projects that the client can afford and use that money towards wise financial investment use in buildings. Some look at skin deep beauty but it takes too much out of the budget for some aesthetic piece that might have been better and wiser to use a less expensive alternative but however is a wiser use of the money spent.
The benefit of the solution is critically important for the outcome. The wise frugal architect doesn't design whimsically and is picky about the pros/cons of specifying materials used, equipment, etc. Total understanding of how the dollars are spent to maximum the best outcome now and over life-cycle of the project.
Economics is handy in that regard. Teaching English has next to zero value to an architectural firm. They don't care if someone has a teaching background. The teaching experience maybe of value if one's goal is to teach architecture so any teaching experience is valid in that regard.
I suppose it comes down to what your actual career goal is. Teaching or Practicing Architecture?
Spidey
Oct 21, 14 11:41 pm
I've seen many non-architecture background people having trouble in M.Arch. Though the ones that seem to be getting by much better are those that took a year or more off and got some first-hand experience in architecture or related. The decision is very personal, but if you do take a year off or more, get some experience in the field of architecture. Don't waste that time.
I'm having trouble deciding whether to do the M.arch program (for non architectural background) straight after undergrad or taking a gap year (or two). Is it beneficial to work before and gain some real world experience? I don't want to get burnt out but also am thinking that it may be good to go ahead and start my career. Any advice?
Thanks!
if you have a position available, it might help to work for a year to meet people that can help you land a job once you get out. it will also give you exposure to the profession you wouldn't get by staying in school.
study abroad
So your first degree is not in architecture? In general I think there is tremendous benefit in getting some real life experience and being able to reflect back on that when returning to school. However, if you are very keen to get started in architecture and aren't able to get a job in the field because of your current education, you may wish to continue straight on. It's really a personal choice about what you think will be best for your personal growth and development and your aims.
This is always the million dollar question - go straight through or take a year or two between.
First, I would apply to programs and plan to pursue the degree directly after your program because you can always decide later to not go if admitted. Next spring, you cannot apply to programs after the deadline if you do not have a position.
Normally, I would suggest you work between degrees to broaden your exposure to the profession, discipline, but can you find employment? What is your UG degree?
Remember, that most graduate programs for those with a degree in another discipline may be 3-4 years -- taking a year or two in between may be a nice diversion if you can afford it.
Best
@DocArchitecture
Thank you all for your advice!
My undergrad is in economics and if I took a year off, I was thinking about teaching English abroad.
And what would teaching English abroad do to further your pursuit of architecture?
ewn1626,
Maybe consider how you apply your economics education into the business end of architecture. Considering economics would be related to a business administration but more focused on the math end of finacial accounting, you still have your business fundamentals embedded in the materials you would have been studying out of. Many architects are total sh-theads when it comes to money and economics. Your economics background can help you design projects that the client can afford and use that money towards wise financial investment use in buildings. Some look at skin deep beauty but it takes too much out of the budget for some aesthetic piece that might have been better and wiser to use a less expensive alternative but however is a wiser use of the money spent.
The benefit of the solution is critically important for the outcome. The wise frugal architect doesn't design whimsically and is picky about the pros/cons of specifying materials used, equipment, etc. Total understanding of how the dollars are spent to maximum the best outcome now and over life-cycle of the project.
Economics is handy in that regard. Teaching English has next to zero value to an architectural firm. They don't care if someone has a teaching background. The teaching experience maybe of value if one's goal is to teach architecture so any teaching experience is valid in that regard.
I suppose it comes down to what your actual career goal is. Teaching or Practicing Architecture?
I've seen many non-architecture background people having trouble in M.Arch. Though the ones that seem to be getting by much better are those that took a year or more off and got some first-hand experience in architecture or related. The decision is very personal, but if you do take a year off or more, get some experience in the field of architecture. Don't waste that time.