So a friend showed me GSD's most recent fund-raising letter directed to alumni: "...GSD recruits and educates the very best students. These students graduate with an average debt of $61,000. Confronting repayment in a down market, with starting salaries averaging $48,000, is daunting..."
"The very best" start in NYC at $48,000 w/their Ivy-minted M.Arch, and face a probable decade plus of student loan debt and pinched circumstances, if they operate without parental financial support or wealthier spouse. Architecture has truly become a rich man's near-exclusive pursuit.
no-one should be bitching about a $61,000 education from one of the best design schools in the world...PERIOD. Specially since most kids going to GSD are supported by their parents. Go talk to the kid who isnt getting shit from their parents and are forced to goto a private school just to get a college diploma.
wait wait a minute people, lets make one thing clear, Harvard Architecture is not what Harvard is known for, in fact it is on par with the wackiest architecture programs out there, before you take a punch at me, remember that Harvard is just that a name to put on your resume.
I was in B of A the other day getting a new ATM card and the woman who was helping me had graduation from the Unive of Houston with an Arch degree. She had gone to UIC previously and transferred there. The only way she could afford to pay her students loans was to work at the bank. On the other hand I have an artist friend who got an MFA in photography who was able to pay off his loans in less than a year because sold something like $500k worth of work in 18 months after graduating. He's on fire!
"Architecture has truly become a rich man's near-exclusive pursuit"
No. The system of higher education in the united states, particularly those schools of the private "Ivy League" are becoming increasingly the near-exclusive pursuit of the rich man.
IamGray - um, no? the GSD gave me better financial aid than any of the other schools i was considering (many of them public). but i am still in massive debt. i do not think the exclusivity is limited to, or even worse at ivies. in fact, most of the ivies are FREE for students from a household with less than 100k income (undergrad). don't spread bad information if you really aren't sure about it. graduate school is a bit of an exception (especially for architecture, because those schools tend to have tiny endowments from which to draw scholarships).
but more importantly, architects ARE extraneous (we really have ALWAYS been seen that way, but i think it just seems worse in context of the recession). in most states, an architect is LITERALLY a luxury when building a home. doesn't it make sense that clients think this might also be the case for commercial buildings, even though they need the stamp?
sweeping admittance? i think you meant admission? i am confused by that statement. i am not sure what you think i claimed. certainly email me if you'd like to clarify. i got into three ivies, and several other schools. so what? i have no problem sending you a copy of an admission letter or a transcript or something (however weird it is that you'd want proof. cincinnati is an excellent school as well. i have never implied otherwise. i simply think the educational system is broken and that no school is immune. people have the GSD on a pedastal, yet my point is that their students have trouble, too).
i am not sure what YOU are implying. i am merely warning potential students that no degree is a ticket to success. and that there are a LOT of young architects out there, and NOT a lot of spots for them. it is rough. for many people, there IS no discouragement from architecture because they love it. but i think those people for whom it is questionable need to think twice about the profession - especially right now.
i really don't care if you trust me as a person, i was only referring to the fact that i have been mentioning troubles for classmates regarding employment. you seemed to not believe it until you asked for more information here....
the debt and salary numbers seem about right, but the important missing number is "% of graduates employed".
if GSD graduates are averaging $61k debt, but have a decent chance at being employed at a $48k salary, it isn't a horrible situation. if only 30% of GSD graduates are getting jobs, then we have a bad situation.
CMNDCTRL, I'm not actually sure what you're disagreeing with.
GSD charges 37 000 USD / year for tuition
The University of Toronto charges 8170 CAD / year for tuition.
ETH zürich charges 1200 CHF / year for tution
Now, one could argue that the quality of education isn't exactly equal, yet all three are good schools in their own right and have produced successful architects.
I dunno, with numbers like that, the GSD better be giving a TON of financial aid to convince me that it's worth it.
Seriously, if one applies to GSD or one of the other Ivy schools and can either swing it financially or gets significant financial aid, then by all means go for it.
If not, don't complain to me about your stupid debt when there were other (far cheaper) options available.
yeah, IamGray, i tend to not be as clear as i should be in writing. sorry about that (no harm, no foul?) i just meant that i think no one school (or group of schools) is more OR less guilty right now. if you get in-state tuition, some state schools can be MUCH cheaper. but if that is not an option, many of them can rival the prices of the most expensive private schools.
i let my emotion get the better of me on these posts sometimes, but really i am just venting. i LOVE architecture. but the system that is set up to educate architects seems to need some tweaking, and it has left a bad taste in my mouth. i can appreciate the opinion that if someone gets in that debt, it is his/her fault. but the problem is that it seemed so nebulous to me at the beginning. there is not a lot of transparency for young students going into that debt, and they don't really understand the implications of the repayment, the interest rates, the actual take-home amount for a salary, and add all that to the fact that packages can change substantially year to year. i guess the burden should be on them/me, but i also think the schools should take some responsibility, too. don't schools in other countries have repayment plans (and tuition) tied to the income of your chosen profession?
same goes to you, jk3hl - sorry if that came of negatively, it really was not meant that way! (maybe we need emoticons on here!). i really am in a much better place in my life now that i am pursuing something else. i think my problem was that i thought working/trying hard, and going to the best school i POSSIBLY could was a good idea - despite the debt. and i am just trying to warn other people not to follow the same path unless they know what they are getting into.
maybe i need to go find a US school and debt thread instead! i do not mean to thread-jack.....i think it's all related. but i will go post to a different thread anyway. where is IHATEMARXISTS to be the bad guy when i need him? (just to be clear, that was again, a joke. don't flame me now, marxists).
CMNDCTRL, since you graduated from the GSD, can you inform us on the employment situation for GSD grads? how many of you found jobs post-graduation? what kind of salaries are you looking at? what is the typical debt situation? are the numbers above accurate?
i did not graduate recently. i was actually about to GO BACK (because in my desperation, i thought another EXPENSIVE degree might set me apart enough to survive the recession), when i was admitted again, i made sure to get the statistics before plunking down more cash. i decided not to go, but to pursue a different path.
i really don't want to get back into the game of passing around that info, actually. i am sorry. i gave the numbers to a few people, but i really don't think it would do much good either way. a lot of people have emailed me for the numbers, and since architecture is a pretty small world, i'd like to not be the one to spread information around about a powerful school (that could have someone like me made past tense! hahaha). i will say the numbers are not great. SURPRISINGLY not great. the most recent survey was only a month or so after graduation though, so maybe more of the class has found employment by now?
for the record, i do not think any unemployment issues are the schools' faults per se. i do think they admit too many students in general, and should have seen the bubble bursting. but it is bad for MANY young architects right now, and the schools probably could not have forseen just how bad it would get. the dilemma is obviously a difficult one, with no clear solution.
i think ultimately, architecture is not a great field to bet on with big student debt. it just seems to be harder to avoid that big debt any more. from anecdotal evidence, law is in a similar boat. but i honeslty never know what information to take with a grain of salt. i have read these statistics about grads of all disciplines not getting jobs, defaulting at high rates etc. but is that the newspaper painting a bad picture to get more readers? or is it good, robust, data? shouldn't NCARB make the schools publish their stats like law schools and b schools do?
hahaha...i DID leave a vacancy, do you want it? but seriously, thanks, UNI......what's with all the name changes by the way? did you let IHATEMARXISTS get to you? or are you actually him/her? or are you just playing around with him/her? i missed something in there i think as to how you jumped to the marxist stuff for a while...
i know plenty of GSD grads living off parents and/or without a jobby job.
Truth is though, that more of their kind care about architecture than the ppl that go to non-starchitecture school. Thats what its all about when you go to the ivory towers, to get an exclusive education. The debt.. si expensive for dreamers
Re: the University of Toronto, is that 8170 Canadian dollars for international students? When I was accepted there a number of years ago, Canadian residents paid about 4000 Canadian dollars per year tuition... Maybe it has gone up... and that was considered an *expensive school* in Canada... Different provinces, UBC or McGill for example are about half of that I think, maybe a bit more... So yeah, as a Canadian resident at the time of grad school, Ivies seemed totally ridiculous considering that you can get a 4 year bachelors plus 3.5 year M Arch at a top Canadian University with IMHO as competitive an education as anyplace for less than one years worth of tuition at Harvard... Expensive means different things depending what country you live in... :P
"...but i will go post to a different thread anyway. where is IHATEMARXISTS to be the bad guy when i need him?..."
Never fear. I am always the "bad" guy. Hint: War is peace, fear is courage, ignorance is strength with marxists (its their dialectical thought nonsense which turns their brains to cream of wheat).
Don't waste too much time arguing with the hopelessly blind and drunk.
They might be worth arguing with when a few of them survive the onset of reality in the next decade or so once, and once their hangovers have worn off.
Until then, don't bother too much. They are mostly hopeless individuals who seek to find solace in their misery by tearing everyone else down to their low common denominator.
Its just the rules of the game that this idiocracy has established for itself. I don't like the rules but I've learned to play within these idiot's pathetic expectations.
I had said, "Until then, don't bother too much. They are mostly hopeless individuals who seek to find solace in their misery by tearing everyone else down to their low common denominator."
Case in point. Don't cast your pearls before swine (or marxists).
I've been warning everyone on this forum and others for at least five full years about the realities of, among other things, NCARB, the AIA, and NAAB, the IRS, the Federal government, and the esp. the dangers of marxist/ equality driven thinking. Of course, cognitive dissonance is a bitch for the hopelessly infected and most otherwise comfortable individuals think they can ignore the truth by silencing it and most (97.5% perhaps?) didn't want to hear it.
It is everyman for himself now. Make no mistake: The Titanic is about to go into full death roll.
I saw the signs and heeded my common sense. I didn't listen to the band playing on the deck which was supposed to disguise the harsh reality of the situation the "greatest" generation and the boomers have left folks aged 35 and under in.
I'm already in a lifeboat with my family and friends...a mile off...watching the show unfold...its quite spectacular to behold from here...good entertainment actually.
Just waiting for the rescue ship to take me back to dry land at this point...its only a matter of time...I can wait a decade or more if I must at this point.
Set your things in order as best you can and Abandon Ship as quickly as you can.
Just to clarify, I'm not discouraging all but the wealthy from attending GSD or other similarly expensive schools, although I can understand where one might get that impression after reading my previous posts.
Rather, I'm just stating that there ARE alternatives out there. Alternatives that shouldn't be over-looked.
But like I said earlier, if someone wants to go to GSD and can swing it financially (or as you yourself were, comfortable with the debt incurred), then they should by all means go for it.
How 'normal' is it for architecture schools to shake down alumni for cash?
I haven't heard a peep from my alma mater and I would be willing to give. Seems like Harvard has the GSD's [and it's students] back.
Whilst all of us middle of the road dudes love to lambast the GSD or the GSAPP or the GAUD, I, for one, don't think that all of the lambasting is warranted. At all.
On a slightly larger note, this profession eats its young.
What's with the GSD approbation? "creativity expert" makes a good point: architecture is not one of Harvard's strong points. It's the same with their engineering or extension school programs. These may be schools in an elite university, but these are not really "elite" schools in themselves, and it is unclear that GSD is the best in the architecture field just because a questionable ranking source said so for a few years.
Moving onto the main discussion at hand. OP, you seem to presume the following, which are not necessarily true:
(1) That because a source from Harvard claims their own school to produce the "very best" architecture students [without even any supporting evidence], it must be the case that Harvard actually produces the "very best" architecture students.
(2) That the starting salaries of the "very best" architecture students necessarily correspond with relatively higher starting salaries of architecture students in general.
Time to brush up on your logical skills if you are planning to take the GRE Analytical Writing section soon!
My school calls me CONSTANTLY for 'alumni giving'. In fact I've been fending off calls from them for days. I always give the same answer: "I would be happy to donate as soon as I finish paying my student loans from my OWN tuition. That's estimated to be in another 20 years so call me back then." It doesn't appear to work, but frankly that's 100% how I feel. Why on earth would I donate money to some new sucker when I still carry tens of thousands of dollars of debt myself, for my own tuition?
I just want to point out that anyone who comes out of any grad program with virtually no prior office experience is going to have a tough time finding a decent-paying job in any firm - even if the economy gets a little better - it doesn't matter if you went to the GSD or some bottom-tier program. experience trumps credentials.
also - one thing that has been bugging me about "top programs" is that their acceptance rate into advanced placement (typically people with 4-year arch degrees and significant work experience) is much lower than that of their general MArch admission. I'm wondering if this number reflects people who were rejected for AP, but accepted in general admission, or if highly skilled people (who are already successful in the field) who qualify for AP are being screwed out of getting into top programs.
The reality is that many people from upper middle class and middle class backgrounds may experience intergenerational downward income mobility. One study speculated that for the children of families in the top income decile, born between 1970 and 2000, less than 15% will experience upward mobility, something slightly more than 35% will stay the same.. and the remaining half will be poorer. This means that many people from such backgrounds depend on their parents or on trust funds to pay tuiition and rent.. sometimes permanently.
re ljkfux and creativity expert: over the last twenty years or so, Harvard's design school has been arguably the consensus pick for the best Architecture school in the US and one of the top schools in the world. Harvard has no engineering school and the extension school may cheapen the brand, but it does so for the whole University, and they are willing to accept this as a trade-off for strengthened ties with the local community. You can knock the GSD all you want, but the alumni network is talented, diverse, and powerful, with a track record of success that counts for a little more than just being able to put the name on a resume.
"has been arguably the consensus pick for the best Architecture school in the US"
what are you talking about? the Princeton review? or Newsweek? who is doing the arguing? Real scientific consensus..., saying that Harvard is the best in architecture is like saying that Sci arch is the best medical school.
You can look at any ranking published in the last 20 years and the GSD will be at or near the top. Then you can go out and ask practitioners about their opinion of GSD grads, again, at or near the top. Then you can go and look at the body of work produced by GSD grads, again some of the deepest and most influential of any alumni group in our profession. By the way, Sci-Arc doesn't have a medical school.
No, we dont need to go back that far just go the their website now, and you can see the crap they are producing.
"Then you can go out and ask practitioners about their opinion of GSD grads, again, at or near the top"
Have you been working out in this field? have you actually seen the crap that "practitioners" have been producing today? and these guys who produce crap, say that Harvard is the best? you gotta be kidding me. are you fresh out of college? In fact it probably makes sense that harvard grads are thought of as the best in this very miserable time and state of affairs that Architecture finds itself in right now.
ps. By the way my point Harvard is on par with Sci arc. aka part of the crazy programs.
You know what 9 hundred million,
I am not saying the Harvard is the worst program, just saying it is definitely not the best. In retrospect, I don't even want to stand up for the College I went to, why? because right now, we Architecture people, are seeing the worst times, with over 50% unemployment in our profession.
I place the blame squarely on the shoulders of a college system, that teaches all of us to be passionate, but does not teach us that we must be compensated well for our services, and that's how lawyers and doctors have architects beat, doctors and lawyers, come out of college with the assurance that they must be payed very well, and that is the mentality that is lacking in Architecture, The justice department can't go after any doctors or lawyers for price fixing, because there is nothing written down that says what they must be payed, it is a non verbal, unwritten, accepted practice to pay doctors and lawyers very well.
ps. and those doctors and lawyers deserve every penny. seeing my family members go through surgery, or seeing someone being defended in court and coming out winning the case, makes me want to pat those guys on the back for a hell of good job they do. I think that their predecessors left them that legacy to be passionate, but to also be well compensated. The legacy Architects are left with is not one of being well compensated. Just think about this, when we first start out of college we get payed on par with interior designers, cad draftsmen, secretaries, and janitors. There is something seriously wrong with that picture.
Its hard, but if any of us are going to come up with ways to survive we can either do it alone, or we can do it together. This mentality of "my college is better than yours" is something we should try to do away with, because no matter where we went to college, there is always that common goal(s), to make good architecture, to do some good in our communities.
Maybe I drank too much o.j. , but i do believe that we are being "divided and conquered", by professions that would love to see Architects go the way of the dodo. namely (GC's, Developers, Engineers, Interior decorators, Commissioning agents, Specialists, Sub contractors, lawyers even, your friends that say architects only draw pretty picture) you name them everyone has an opinion about how Architects should do there job, Are we going to let everyone destroy this profession? only time will tell.
"Best" architecture program rankings are based upon professors' opinions, not upon graduates' professional abilities, percentage of licensed professionals, or alumni-practioners' salary/career achievement. I suspect that law, medical, and MBA schools are not ranked in such an arbritrary manner. I recall years ago that Illinois Institute of Technology supposedly had the highest "pass" rate for the licensing exam, while always excluded from "top architectural school" lists.
Graduate placement rates at Ivy architectural schools are misleading reflections of "school quality" as well. Here in Chicago, Ivy grads receive a certain degree of special consideration which doesn't necessarily reflect caliber of job-candidate, because these people are relatively rare in Midwest and Midwestern are impressed by a HYP degree. The HYP graduates here have had a wide disparity in relative career success, depending on ambition, luck, and connections. Some local IIT graduates have easily outstripped those HYP grads' career success. And former SOM lead partner Adrian Smith is a UIC grad.
Many HYP architecture students come from wealthy families with considerable important connections, which facilitate both admissions as well as job-placements after graduation regardless of student's relative skill level. These wealthy students graduate without loan debt, with connections and strong introductions, without need to consider salary/benefits when seeking employment. They're usually highly presentable in a business context, and their pre-established connections are desirable to firms. There is a middle-aged HYP architect-grad here in Chicago who has listed his self-built modernist house for $5 million --- he's not living on his salary as an architect; his take-home pay probably covers only his RE taxes and utilities.
Why are salaries so low? Consider that many architectural firms do a great deal of work on spec for real estate developers, with payment differed or significantly discounted until client obtains construction financing, and with payment unlikely if project fails to proceed. And failure to pay, or significant delays in payment, are rarely cause for an architecture firm to quit a real estate developer client. Look at the outstanding architectural fees for the Spire project - $4 million? Same situation occurs at the firms at far smaller scale. How can a firm assure living wages when its business model is unsustainable?
creativity expert - it's impossible to say that another program is "definitely not the best" when you have not attended the school yourself. i agree that the educational system is broken, but why do these posts always devolve into bashing a single school, as if that ONE school is the reason the system broke. did you attend the GSD? if not, then your criticism of it should not hold much weight.
We should all focus on continuing to be good at what we do, Architecture, and I would like to see architecture graduates more united, I think it would be a good starting point to an Architectural Recovery. That is what is important to me and what should be important to all of us right now.
ps. if thinking your college is the best is what makes you happy, then by all means continue doing so. I have no interest in explaining to you who I know, and why your college is not the best. The only reason we are talking about your precious college is because the opening post is called
"GSD - Starting Salary and Debt" not because we enjoy talking about it.
GSD - Starting Salary and Debt
So a friend showed me GSD's most recent fund-raising letter directed to alumni: "...GSD recruits and educates the very best students. These students graduate with an average debt of $61,000. Confronting repayment in a down market, with starting salaries averaging $48,000, is daunting..."
"The very best" start in NYC at $48,000 w/their Ivy-minted M.Arch, and face a probable decade plus of student loan debt and pinched circumstances, if they operate without parental financial support or wealthier spouse. Architecture has truly become a rich man's near-exclusive pursuit.
61 is the minimum debt and 48 is the high for new graduates (especially in this economy), not the average.
no-one should be bitching about a $61,000 education from one of the best design schools in the world...PERIOD. Specially since most kids going to GSD are supported by their parents. Go talk to the kid who isnt getting shit from their parents and are forced to goto a private school just to get a college diploma.
can you post that entire letter
I bet 50% graduate with about $120 in debt and the other 50% with none (family support).
Whatever the case maybe, the better figure is job placement rate.
Getting a degree that has a higher chance of getting you hired into a proper entry-level position at any firm for a decent starting salary.
It is a lot better than going to a cheap 3rd-rate state school that currently has like a 60% default rate.
future hope is absolutely right. Those that graduate with debt have 100k+ in debt and the rest are princes and sultans or otherwise wealthy.
wait wait a minute people, lets make one thing clear, Harvard Architecture is not what Harvard is known for, in fact it is on par with the wackiest architecture programs out there, before you take a punch at me, remember that Harvard is just that a name to put on your resume.
ok you ivy gropious fans I'm ready give me your best shot.
Yes, please, the whole letter.
I was in B of A the other day getting a new ATM card and the woman who was helping me had graduation from the Unive of Houston with an Arch degree. She had gone to UIC previously and transferred there. The only way she could afford to pay her students loans was to work at the bank. On the other hand I have an artist friend who got an MFA in photography who was able to pay off his loans in less than a year because sold something like $500k worth of work in 18 months after graduating. He's on fire!
"Architecture has truly become a rich man's near-exclusive pursuit"
No. The system of higher education in the united states, particularly those schools of the private "Ivy League" are becoming increasingly the near-exclusive pursuit of the rich man.
Don't confuse that with the profession itself.
IamGray - um, no? the GSD gave me better financial aid than any of the other schools i was considering (many of them public). but i am still in massive debt. i do not think the exclusivity is limited to, or even worse at ivies. in fact, most of the ivies are FREE for students from a household with less than 100k income (undergrad). don't spread bad information if you really aren't sure about it. graduate school is a bit of an exception (especially for architecture, because those schools tend to have tiny endowments from which to draw scholarships).
but more importantly, architects ARE extraneous (we really have ALWAYS been seen that way, but i think it just seems worse in context of the recession). in most states, an architect is LITERALLY a luxury when building a home. doesn't it make sense that clients think this might also be the case for commercial buildings, even though they need the stamp?
jk3hl - do you trust me NOW?
for clarification, i had NO support from my (poor) family. the GSD (like all the ivies) is need-blind.
@cmndctrl
look dude... the way you've been portraying yourself on these forums doesn't exactly inspire 'trust'
i'm afraid i remain pretty skeptical regarding your claims of sweeping admittance into all ivy-league schools
salaries averaging $48K?
I call bullshit.
sweeping admittance? i think you meant admission? i am confused by that statement. i am not sure what you think i claimed. certainly email me if you'd like to clarify. i got into three ivies, and several other schools. so what? i have no problem sending you a copy of an admission letter or a transcript or something (however weird it is that you'd want proof. cincinnati is an excellent school as well. i have never implied otherwise. i simply think the educational system is broken and that no school is immune. people have the GSD on a pedastal, yet my point is that their students have trouble, too).
i am not sure what YOU are implying. i am merely warning potential students that no degree is a ticket to success. and that there are a LOT of young architects out there, and NOT a lot of spots for them. it is rough. for many people, there IS no discouragement from architecture because they love it. but i think those people for whom it is questionable need to think twice about the profession - especially right now.
i really don't care if you trust me as a person, i was only referring to the fact that i have been mentioning troubles for classmates regarding employment. you seemed to not believe it until you asked for more information here....
sorry for any confusion?
good luck.
the debt and salary numbers seem about right, but the important missing number is "% of graduates employed".
if GSD graduates are averaging $61k debt, but have a decent chance at being employed at a $48k salary, it isn't a horrible situation. if only 30% of GSD graduates are getting jobs, then we have a bad situation.
CMNDCTRL, I'm not actually sure what you're disagreeing with.
GSD charges 37 000 USD / year for tuition
The University of Toronto charges 8170 CAD / year for tuition.
ETH zürich charges 1200 CHF / year for tution
Now, one could argue that the quality of education isn't exactly equal, yet all three are good schools in their own right and have produced successful architects.
I dunno, with numbers like that, the GSD better be giving a TON of financial aid to convince me that it's worth it.
Seriously, if one applies to GSD or one of the other Ivy schools and can either swing it financially or gets significant financial aid, then by all means go for it.
If not, don't complain to me about your stupid debt when there were other (far cheaper) options available.
Ehhhhh..... these are the facts of life!
At least many of you are only struggling with whether or not you were accepted in or could afford to go to GSD.
In Florida, if you don't have a car... you will end up homeless. Now imagine if that was your personal struggle every day?
yeah, IamGray, i tend to not be as clear as i should be in writing. sorry about that (no harm, no foul?) i just meant that i think no one school (or group of schools) is more OR less guilty right now. if you get in-state tuition, some state schools can be MUCH cheaper. but if that is not an option, many of them can rival the prices of the most expensive private schools.
i let my emotion get the better of me on these posts sometimes, but really i am just venting. i LOVE architecture. but the system that is set up to educate architects seems to need some tweaking, and it has left a bad taste in my mouth. i can appreciate the opinion that if someone gets in that debt, it is his/her fault. but the problem is that it seemed so nebulous to me at the beginning. there is not a lot of transparency for young students going into that debt, and they don't really understand the implications of the repayment, the interest rates, the actual take-home amount for a salary, and add all that to the fact that packages can change substantially year to year. i guess the burden should be on them/me, but i also think the schools should take some responsibility, too. don't schools in other countries have repayment plans (and tuition) tied to the income of your chosen profession?
same goes to you, jk3hl - sorry if that came of negatively, it really was not meant that way! (maybe we need emoticons on here!). i really am in a much better place in my life now that i am pursuing something else. i think my problem was that i thought working/trying hard, and going to the best school i POSSIBLY could was a good idea - despite the debt. and i am just trying to warn other people not to follow the same path unless they know what they are getting into.
maybe i need to go find a US school and debt thread instead! i do not mean to thread-jack.....i think it's all related. but i will go post to a different thread anyway. where is IHATEMARXISTS to be the bad guy when i need him? (just to be clear, that was again, a joke. don't flame me now, marxists).
good luck.
CMNDCTRL, since you graduated from the GSD, can you inform us on the employment situation for GSD grads? how many of you found jobs post-graduation? what kind of salaries are you looking at? what is the typical debt situation? are the numbers above accurate?
i did not graduate recently. i was actually about to GO BACK (because in my desperation, i thought another EXPENSIVE degree might set me apart enough to survive the recession), when i was admitted again, i made sure to get the statistics before plunking down more cash. i decided not to go, but to pursue a different path.
i really don't want to get back into the game of passing around that info, actually. i am sorry. i gave the numbers to a few people, but i really don't think it would do much good either way. a lot of people have emailed me for the numbers, and since architecture is a pretty small world, i'd like to not be the one to spread information around about a powerful school (that could have someone like me made past tense! hahaha). i will say the numbers are not great. SURPRISINGLY not great. the most recent survey was only a month or so after graduation though, so maybe more of the class has found employment by now?
for the record, i do not think any unemployment issues are the schools' faults per se. i do think they admit too many students in general, and should have seen the bubble bursting. but it is bad for MANY young architects right now, and the schools probably could not have forseen just how bad it would get. the dilemma is obviously a difficult one, with no clear solution.
i think ultimately, architecture is not a great field to bet on with big student debt. it just seems to be harder to avoid that big debt any more. from anecdotal evidence, law is in a similar boat. but i honeslty never know what information to take with a grain of salt. i have read these statistics about grads of all disciplines not getting jobs, defaulting at high rates etc. but is that the newspaper painting a bad picture to get more readers? or is it good, robust, data? shouldn't NCARB make the schools publish their stats like law schools and b schools do?
Oh God.
You went to GSD and cannot find a job?
YOU MUST FAIL AT LIFE.
There I said it.
hahaha...i DID leave a vacancy, do you want it? but seriously, thanks, UNI......what's with all the name changes by the way? did you let IHATEMARXISTS get to you? or are you actually him/her? or are you just playing around with him/her? i missed something in there i think as to how you jumped to the marxist stuff for a while...
ok, on that note. i better get back to my other life...
over and out.....
i know plenty of GSD grads living off parents and/or without a jobby job.
Truth is though, that more of their kind care about architecture than the ppl that go to non-starchitecture school. Thats what its all about when you go to the ivory towers, to get an exclusive education. The debt.. si expensive for dreamers
Re: the University of Toronto, is that 8170 Canadian dollars for international students? When I was accepted there a number of years ago, Canadian residents paid about 4000 Canadian dollars per year tuition... Maybe it has gone up... and that was considered an *expensive school* in Canada... Different provinces, UBC or McGill for example are about half of that I think, maybe a bit more... So yeah, as a Canadian resident at the time of grad school, Ivies seemed totally ridiculous considering that you can get a 4 year bachelors plus 3.5 year M Arch at a top Canadian University with IMHO as competitive an education as anyplace for less than one years worth of tuition at Harvard... Expensive means different things depending what country you live in... :P
CMNDCTRL said,
"...but i will go post to a different thread anyway. where is IHATEMARXISTS to be the bad guy when i need him?..."
Never fear. I am always the "bad" guy. Hint: War is peace, fear is courage, ignorance is strength with marxists (its their dialectical thought nonsense which turns their brains to cream of wheat).
Don't waste too much time arguing with the hopelessly blind and drunk.
They might be worth arguing with when a few of them survive the onset of reality in the next decade or so once, and once their hangovers have worn off.
Until then, don't bother too much. They are mostly hopeless individuals who seek to find solace in their misery by tearing everyone else down to their low common denominator.
Its just the rules of the game that this idiocracy has established for itself. I don't like the rules but I've learned to play within these idiot's pathetic expectations.
Distant Unicorn said, "Oh God.
You went to GSD and cannot find a job?
YOU MUST FAIL AT LIFE.
There I said it."
I had said, "Until then, don't bother too much. They are mostly hopeless individuals who seek to find solace in their misery by tearing everyone else down to their low common denominator."
Case in point. Don't cast your pearls before swine (or marxists).
I've been warning everyone on this forum and others for at least five full years about the realities of, among other things, NCARB, the AIA, and NAAB, the IRS, the Federal government, and the esp. the dangers of marxist/ equality driven thinking. Of course, cognitive dissonance is a bitch for the hopelessly infected and most otherwise comfortable individuals think they can ignore the truth by silencing it and most (97.5% perhaps?) didn't want to hear it.
It is everyman for himself now. Make no mistake: The Titanic is about to go into full death roll.
I saw the signs and heeded my common sense. I didn't listen to the band playing on the deck which was supposed to disguise the harsh reality of the situation the "greatest" generation and the boomers have left folks aged 35 and under in.
I'm already in a lifeboat with my family and friends...a mile off...watching the show unfold...its quite spectacular to behold from here...good entertainment actually.
Just waiting for the rescue ship to take me back to dry land at this point...its only a matter of time...I can wait a decade or more if I must at this point.
Set your things in order as best you can and Abandon Ship as quickly as you can.
18x32:
Just to clarify, I'm not discouraging all but the wealthy from attending GSD or other similarly expensive schools, although I can understand where one might get that impression after reading my previous posts.
Rather, I'm just stating that there ARE alternatives out there. Alternatives that shouldn't be over-looked.
But like I said earlier, if someone wants to go to GSD and can swing it financially (or as you yourself were, comfortable with the debt incurred), then they should by all means go for it.
Can I take another approach here?
How 'normal' is it for architecture schools to shake down alumni for cash?
I haven't heard a peep from my alma mater and I would be willing to give. Seems like Harvard has the GSD's [and it's students] back.
Whilst all of us middle of the road dudes love to lambast the GSD or the GSAPP or the GAUD, I, for one, don't think that all of the lambasting is warranted. At all.
On a slightly larger note, this profession eats its young.
What's with the GSD approbation? "creativity expert" makes a good point: architecture is not one of Harvard's strong points. It's the same with their engineering or extension school programs. These may be schools in an elite university, but these are not really "elite" schools in themselves, and it is unclear that GSD is the best in the architecture field just because a questionable ranking source said so for a few years.
Moving onto the main discussion at hand. OP, you seem to presume the following, which are not necessarily true:
(1) That because a source from Harvard claims their own school to produce the "very best" architecture students [without even any supporting evidence], it must be the case that Harvard actually produces the "very best" architecture students.
(2) That the starting salaries of the "very best" architecture students necessarily correspond with relatively higher starting salaries of architecture students in general.
Time to brush up on your logical skills if you are planning to take the GRE Analytical Writing section soon!
My school calls me CONSTANTLY for 'alumni giving'. In fact I've been fending off calls from them for days. I always give the same answer: "I would be happy to donate as soon as I finish paying my student loans from my OWN tuition. That's estimated to be in another 20 years so call me back then." It doesn't appear to work, but frankly that's 100% how I feel. Why on earth would I donate money to some new sucker when I still carry tens of thousands of dollars of debt myself, for my own tuition?
mantaray, that's quite hilarious situation.
I just want to point out that anyone who comes out of any grad program with virtually no prior office experience is going to have a tough time finding a decent-paying job in any firm - even if the economy gets a little better - it doesn't matter if you went to the GSD or some bottom-tier program. experience trumps credentials.
also - one thing that has been bugging me about "top programs" is that their acceptance rate into advanced placement (typically people with 4-year arch degrees and significant work experience) is much lower than that of their general MArch admission. I'm wondering if this number reflects people who were rejected for AP, but accepted in general admission, or if highly skilled people (who are already successful in the field) who qualify for AP are being screwed out of getting into top programs.
The reality is that many people from upper middle class and middle class backgrounds may experience intergenerational downward income mobility. One study speculated that for the children of families in the top income decile, born between 1970 and 2000, less than 15% will experience upward mobility, something slightly more than 35% will stay the same.. and the remaining half will be poorer. This means that many people from such backgrounds depend on their parents or on trust funds to pay tuiition and rent.. sometimes permanently.
re ljkfux and creativity expert: over the last twenty years or so, Harvard's design school has been arguably the consensus pick for the best Architecture school in the US and one of the top schools in the world. Harvard has no engineering school and the extension school may cheapen the brand, but it does so for the whole University, and they are willing to accept this as a trade-off for strengthened ties with the local community. You can knock the GSD all you want, but the alumni network is talented, diverse, and powerful, with a track record of success that counts for a little more than just being able to put the name on a resume.
"has been arguably the consensus pick for the best Architecture school in the US"
what are you talking about? the Princeton review? or Newsweek? who is doing the arguing? Real scientific consensus..., saying that Harvard is the best in architecture is like saying that Sci arch is the best medical school.
You can look at any ranking published in the last 20 years and the GSD will be at or near the top. Then you can go out and ask practitioners about their opinion of GSD grads, again, at or near the top. Then you can go and look at the body of work produced by GSD grads, again some of the deepest and most influential of any alumni group in our profession. By the way, Sci-Arc doesn't have a medical school.
No, we dont need to go back that far just go the their website now, and you can see the crap they are producing.
"Then you can go out and ask practitioners about their opinion of GSD grads, again, at or near the top"
Have you been working out in this field? have you actually seen the crap that "practitioners" have been producing today? and these guys who produce crap, say that Harvard is the best? you gotta be kidding me. are you fresh out of college? In fact it probably makes sense that harvard grads are thought of as the best in this very miserable time and state of affairs that Architecture finds itself in right now.
ps. By the way my point Harvard is on par with Sci arc. aka part of the crazy programs.
You know what 9 hundred million,
I am not saying the Harvard is the worst program, just saying it is definitely not the best. In retrospect, I don't even want to stand up for the College I went to, why? because right now, we Architecture people, are seeing the worst times, with over 50% unemployment in our profession.
I place the blame squarely on the shoulders of a college system, that teaches all of us to be passionate, but does not teach us that we must be compensated well for our services, and that's how lawyers and doctors have architects beat, doctors and lawyers, come out of college with the assurance that they must be payed very well, and that is the mentality that is lacking in Architecture, The justice department can't go after any doctors or lawyers for price fixing, because there is nothing written down that says what they must be payed, it is a non verbal, unwritten, accepted practice to pay doctors and lawyers very well.
ps. and those doctors and lawyers deserve every penny. seeing my family members go through surgery, or seeing someone being defended in court and coming out winning the case, makes me want to pat those guys on the back for a hell of good job they do. I think that their predecessors left them that legacy to be passionate, but to also be well compensated. The legacy Architects are left with is not one of being well compensated. Just think about this, when we first start out of college we get payed on par with interior designers, cad draftsmen, secretaries, and janitors. There is something seriously wrong with that picture.
all i will say is that i'm a sci-arc graduate, i have a few beers in me, and i can pee further than anyone on this thread!
Its hard, but if any of us are going to come up with ways to survive we can either do it alone, or we can do it together. This mentality of "my college is better than yours" is something we should try to do away with, because no matter where we went to college, there is always that common goal(s), to make good architecture, to do some good in our communities.
Maybe I drank too much o.j. , but i do believe that we are being "divided and conquered", by professions that would love to see Architects go the way of the dodo. namely (GC's, Developers, Engineers, Interior decorators, Commissioning agents, Specialists, Sub contractors, lawyers even, your friends that say architects only draw pretty picture) you name them everyone has an opinion about how Architects should do there job, Are we going to let everyone destroy this profession? only time will tell.
"Best" architecture program rankings are based upon professors' opinions, not upon graduates' professional abilities, percentage of licensed professionals, or alumni-practioners' salary/career achievement. I suspect that law, medical, and MBA schools are not ranked in such an arbritrary manner. I recall years ago that Illinois Institute of Technology supposedly had the highest "pass" rate for the licensing exam, while always excluded from "top architectural school" lists.
Graduate placement rates at Ivy architectural schools are misleading reflections of "school quality" as well. Here in Chicago, Ivy grads receive a certain degree of special consideration which doesn't necessarily reflect caliber of job-candidate, because these people are relatively rare in Midwest and Midwestern are impressed by a HYP degree. The HYP graduates here have had a wide disparity in relative career success, depending on ambition, luck, and connections. Some local IIT graduates have easily outstripped those HYP grads' career success. And former SOM lead partner Adrian Smith is a UIC grad.
Many HYP architecture students come from wealthy families with considerable important connections, which facilitate both admissions as well as job-placements after graduation regardless of student's relative skill level. These wealthy students graduate without loan debt, with connections and strong introductions, without need to consider salary/benefits when seeking employment. They're usually highly presentable in a business context, and their pre-established connections are desirable to firms. There is a middle-aged HYP architect-grad here in Chicago who has listed his self-built modernist house for $5 million --- he's not living on his salary as an architect; his take-home pay probably covers only his RE taxes and utilities.
Why are salaries so low? Consider that many architectural firms do a great deal of work on spec for real estate developers, with payment differed or significantly discounted until client obtains construction financing, and with payment unlikely if project fails to proceed. And failure to pay, or significant delays in payment, are rarely cause for an architecture firm to quit a real estate developer client. Look at the outstanding architectural fees for the Spire project - $4 million? Same situation occurs at the firms at far smaller scale. How can a firm assure living wages when its business model is unsustainable?
creativity expert - it's impossible to say that another program is "definitely not the best" when you have not attended the school yourself. i agree that the educational system is broken, but why do these posts always devolve into bashing a single school, as if that ONE school is the reason the system broke. did you attend the GSD? if not, then your criticism of it should not hold much weight.
LOL, dot!
We should all focus on continuing to be good at what we do, Architecture, and I would like to see architecture graduates more united, I think it would be a good starting point to an Architectural Recovery. That is what is important to me and what should be important to all of us right now.
ps. if thinking your college is the best is what makes you happy, then by all means continue doing so. I have no interest in explaining to you who I know, and why your college is not the best. The only reason we are talking about your precious college is because the opening post is called
"GSD - Starting Salary and Debt" not because we enjoy talking about it.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.