I am hoping to study architecture next year in college. I have narrowed down my choices to Pratt and Wentworth (for logistical and academic reasons) but I still cannot decide on which one to attend.
Obviously both are very different from each other but at the end of the day WIT is cheap and I receive a BS in Arch. after four years (not so much time). Pratt on the other hand is more pricey (about 50% more than WIT) but after five years (more time) I get a NAAB B. Arch. degree.
Are their advantages or disadvantages to either degree?
Can anyone comment on their personal experience at these two colleges?
Is a technical/basic fundamentals education better than a more theoretical/designy one? or the other way around?
All opinions are welcome!
Also I currently see myself going for a M. Arch. somewhere as well so that might affect my choice.
lionshcra
Apr 25, 14 6:57 am
I finished attending WIT 2 years ago. (BS.Arch + 1yr M.Arch). I can't comment on Pratt.
My freshman class was around 300 students, by senior year 150ish, maybe less. M.Arch class was 84.
BS.Arch gives you the flexibility to go elsewhere for the M.Arch, but the degree takes longer than if you do a 4+1 at the same school. Read the WIT employment report to get an idea of where the grads go and how much you expect to make. If Pratt has one I'd read that as well. http://www.wit.edu/career-services/DOCS/2012_Employment_Report.pdf If you scroll down you can see the Construction Managements or Engineering majors. They make >$10,000 more than the M.Arch kids, $20,000 more than the BS.Arch kids straight out of school.
Most of my classmates stayed in Boston or moved to NYC, A few work in Chicago. A few went to California.
I loved attending WIT. The professors are great. They generally seemed to care about your success and most made themselves available. They don't chew you out during reviews (compared to what I've heard about other schools) or have egos (well a few do, but they no longer work at the school).
Keep in mind the cost of living in Boston vs. Brooklyn. Housing in Boston can be cheaper, depending on where you live. For undergrad most people that weren't on campus lived on Mission Hill or Fenway area. Some lived in Jamaica Plain and commuted.
Wentworth is more practice-oriented than theoretical, except during the M.Arch. That was fine with me, as I already knew or seemed to have an easier time picking up things at work than my coworkers who attended elsewhere in Boston.
If you attend WIT, do the study abroad in Berlin or France. The short trip abroad during the start of your M.Arch is fun too.
WIT always renames the concentrations. A few professors I stay in contact with joke that there isn't much difference aside from who tends to teach which one and whether you want to be on coop during the summer or the school year.
Also, if you go, try to align yourself with at least 1 faculty member who practices. It makes it easier to find work/ you'll already have an IDP mentor that meets NCARB's requirements.
Feel free to ask any followup questions.
padthai
Apr 25, 14 12:33 pm
Could you list some of the schools that the WIT BS. Arch. students go to after they graduate?
Is there a tendency for students to stay at Wentworth for a M. Arch. degree?
Do you think that in general students with B. Arch. degrees land better paying jobs than those with the BS. Arch. degrees?
lionshcra
Apr 26, 14 7:44 am
In my senior class of about 150, 84 went into the M.Arch at Wentworth. Others got into Syracuse, University of Oregon, 1 GSD. I'm not sure where else people applied. The others either went to work for architecture, engineering, or construction firms, mainly around Boston. Most of my classmates were from New England.
Of course, a B.Arch is a professional degree, a BS.Arch is not. That's why most of my classmates stayed for the 1yr M.Arch instead of doing elsewhere for 2-3yrs for an M.Arch. Same amount of time as a B.Arch at other schools, though most schools seem to be doing away with the traditional 5yr B.Arch in favor if the 4+1 model.
C. Watts
Apr 26, 14 10:49 am
Most schools don't do a 4+1. Most do a 4+2 (or if you choose to attend somewhere else it can be a 3 year masters). I would say go for the B.Arch because you will have a professional degree and won't even have to get your masters to become licensed. I would also think that Pratt would have better connections down the road. If you have a B.arch it will probably be easier to land a job after undergrad.
C. Watts
Apr 26, 14 10:51 am
Also you could always attempt to graduate a semester early. I had a cousin that was able to finish her B.arch in 4.5 years. It wasn't at Pratt, but I'm sure there is a way.
lionshcra
Apr 26, 14 12:21 pm
Another thing to consider: where do you want to work after you graduate? I agree with C.Watts; Pratt likely has better connections, especially if you want to work in NYC or elsewhere. WIT is great for Boston, but I'm not sure how well known its program is outside of the region.
Out of curiosity, why WIT and Pratt? Would you ever consider an in state school with a reputable program to save money? For example, Cal-Poly.
lionshcra
Apr 26, 14 12:57 pm
"Is a technical/basic fundamentals education better than a more theoretical/designy one? or the other way around? "
That depends on what type of work you want to do after school, which can be difficult to determine before you even start university. Your architectural interests are likely to change over the next several years as you gain exposure to new things both in school and during internships. You'll receive a competent education from either school, but likely one more theory driven at Pratt.
"Also I currently see myself going for a M. Arch. somewhere as well so that might affect my choice."
If you plan to go elsewhere for your M.Arch, I'm not sure I'd recommend WIT. Most students who attend there do so because they receive a BS.Arch + M.Arch 1 in 5 years total, the same amount of time it takes for a traditional B.Arch. If you attended Pratt and received your B.Arch, why would you want to spend several additional years taking on debt and losing out on wages and experience earned working? If you plan to one day teach, that may make sense. If not, it may be a waste of time and money.
Honestly, if I could have done it all over again, I would have gotten my undergrad in a high demand major with higher base earning potential than architecture (Ex. Aerospace or Civil Engineering). You can always go back for a 2-3yr M.Arch, but it's nice to have a 4yr bachelor's degree in engineering to fall back on that makes $60,000 out of school rather than making in the high 30s or low 40s with a BS.Arch or M.Arch. Financial realities set in once you leave school. My coworkers who went for a 5year B.Arch + 2-3yr M.Arch are almost 30 years old, have tons of debt, fewer financial resources to rent in nicer areas, go in vacation, spent on other hobbies, etc. My engineering friends all have their debts under control, are buying homes and enjoy a rather high standard of living. Something to keep in mind that I wish I had paid more attention to.
padthai
Apr 26, 14 5:07 pm
"Out of curiosity, why WIT and Pratt? Would you ever consider an in state school with a reputable program to save money? For example, Cal-Poly."
I considered applying to Umass Amherst but I decided that studying architecture in a city would be much more beneficial. As for Cal-Poly, I was only vaguely familiar with their program until recently and I now regret not applying to them when I was applying to other schools. Who knows though, a transfer is always possible!
Beepbeep
Apr 26, 14 5:57 pm
MASSart or Northeastern also have architecture programs.
padthai
Apr 27, 14 11:32 am
The Northeastern Arch. program is relatively new and I have heard good things about it. Yet it seems easily comparable to WIT's program.
I was thinking of looking at Rice or UPenn as transfer options.
I am hoping to study architecture next year in college. I have narrowed down my choices to Pratt and Wentworth (for logistical and academic reasons) but I still cannot decide on which one to attend.
Obviously both are very different from each other but at the end of the day WIT is cheap and I receive a BS in Arch. after four years (not so much time). Pratt on the other hand is more pricey (about 50% more than WIT) but after five years (more time) I get a NAAB B. Arch. degree.
Are their advantages or disadvantages to either degree?
Can anyone comment on their personal experience at these two colleges?
Is a technical/basic fundamentals education better than a more theoretical/designy one? or the other way around?
All opinions are welcome!
Also I currently see myself going for a M. Arch. somewhere as well so that might affect my choice.
I finished attending WIT 2 years ago. (BS.Arch + 1yr M.Arch). I can't comment on Pratt.
My freshman class was around 300 students, by senior year 150ish, maybe less. M.Arch class was 84.
BS.Arch gives you the flexibility to go elsewhere for the M.Arch, but the degree takes longer than if you do a 4+1 at the same school. Read the WIT employment report to get an idea of where the grads go and how much you expect to make. If Pratt has one I'd read that as well. http://www.wit.edu/career-services/DOCS/2012_Employment_Report.pdf If you scroll down you can see the Construction Managements or Engineering majors. They make >$10,000 more than the M.Arch kids, $20,000 more than the BS.Arch kids straight out of school.
Most of my classmates stayed in Boston or moved to NYC, A few work in Chicago. A few went to California.
I loved attending WIT. The professors are great. They generally seemed to care about your success and most made themselves available. They don't chew you out during reviews (compared to what I've heard about other schools) or have egos (well a few do, but they no longer work at the school).
Keep in mind the cost of living in Boston vs. Brooklyn. Housing in Boston can be cheaper, depending on where you live. For undergrad most people that weren't on campus lived on Mission Hill or Fenway area. Some lived in Jamaica Plain and commuted.
Wentworth is more practice-oriented than theoretical, except during the M.Arch. That was fine with me, as I already knew or seemed to have an easier time picking up things at work than my coworkers who attended elsewhere in Boston.
If you attend WIT, do the study abroad in Berlin or France. The short trip abroad during the start of your M.Arch is fun too.
WIT always renames the concentrations. A few professors I stay in contact with joke that there isn't much difference aside from who tends to teach which one and whether you want to be on coop during the summer or the school year.
Also, if you go, try to align yourself with at least 1 faculty member who practices. It makes it easier to find work/ you'll already have an IDP mentor that meets NCARB's requirements.
Feel free to ask any followup questions.
Could you list some of the schools that the WIT BS. Arch. students go to after they graduate?
Is there a tendency for students to stay at Wentworth for a M. Arch. degree?
Do you think that in general students with B. Arch. degrees land better paying jobs than those with the BS. Arch. degrees?
In my senior class of about 150, 84 went into the M.Arch at Wentworth. Others got into Syracuse, University of Oregon, 1 GSD. I'm not sure where else people applied. The others either went to work for architecture, engineering, or construction firms, mainly around Boston. Most of my classmates were from New England.
Of course, a B.Arch is a professional degree, a BS.Arch is not. That's why most of my classmates stayed for the 1yr M.Arch instead of doing elsewhere for 2-3yrs for an M.Arch. Same amount of time as a B.Arch at other schools, though most schools seem to be doing away with the traditional 5yr B.Arch in favor if the 4+1 model.
Most schools don't do a 4+1. Most do a 4+2 (or if you choose to attend somewhere else it can be a 3 year masters). I would say go for the B.Arch because you will have a professional degree and won't even have to get your masters to become licensed. I would also think that Pratt would have better connections down the road. If you have a B.arch it will probably be easier to land a job after undergrad.
Also you could always attempt to graduate a semester early. I had a cousin that was able to finish her B.arch in 4.5 years. It wasn't at Pratt, but I'm sure there is a way.
Another thing to consider: where do you want to work after you graduate? I agree with C.Watts; Pratt likely has better connections, especially if you want to work in NYC or elsewhere. WIT is great for Boston, but I'm not sure how well known its program is outside of the region.
Out of curiosity, why WIT and Pratt? Would you ever consider an in state school with a reputable program to save money? For example, Cal-Poly.
"Is a technical/basic fundamentals education better than a more theoretical/designy one? or the other way around? "
That depends on what type of work you want to do after school, which can be difficult to determine before you even start university. Your architectural interests are likely to change over the next several years as you gain exposure to new things both in school and during internships. You'll receive a competent education from either school, but likely one more theory driven at Pratt.
"Also I currently see myself going for a M. Arch. somewhere as well so that might affect my choice."
If you plan to go elsewhere for your M.Arch, I'm not sure I'd recommend WIT. Most students who attend there do so because they receive a BS.Arch + M.Arch 1 in 5 years total, the same amount of time it takes for a traditional B.Arch. If you attended Pratt and received your B.Arch, why would you want to spend several additional years taking on debt and losing out on wages and experience earned working? If you plan to one day teach, that may make sense. If not, it may be a waste of time and money.
Honestly, if I could have done it all over again, I would have gotten my undergrad in a high demand major with higher base earning potential than architecture (Ex. Aerospace or Civil Engineering). You can always go back for a 2-3yr M.Arch, but it's nice to have a 4yr bachelor's degree in engineering to fall back on that makes $60,000 out of school rather than making in the high 30s or low 40s with a BS.Arch or M.Arch. Financial realities set in once you leave school. My coworkers who went for a 5year B.Arch + 2-3yr M.Arch are almost 30 years old, have tons of debt, fewer financial resources to rent in nicer areas, go in vacation, spent on other hobbies, etc. My engineering friends all have their debts under control, are buying homes and enjoy a rather high standard of living. Something to keep in mind that I wish I had paid more attention to.
"Out of curiosity, why WIT and Pratt? Would you ever consider an in state school with a reputable program to save money? For example, Cal-Poly."
I considered applying to Umass Amherst but I decided that studying architecture in a city would be much more beneficial. As for Cal-Poly, I was only vaguely familiar with their program until recently and I now regret not applying to them when I was applying to other schools. Who knows though, a transfer is always possible!
MASSart or Northeastern also have architecture programs.
The Northeastern Arch. program is relatively new and I have heard good things about it. Yet it seems easily comparable to WIT's program.
I was thinking of looking at Rice or UPenn as transfer options.