You would apparently need a minor in Civil engineering, but you could take that at Berkeley before you apply for the M.S., but after you're already in the school.  My plan is to take about half the minor after I graduate at Michigan (hopefully while working at a firm).

It is very difficult to get into Berkeley for an MS, as they are one of the top graduate programs in civil. They will evaluate you independent of your architecture portfolio/application. And while a 3.7 gpa is decent, it is not that great... a 3.7 would be good in engineering as the gpas are generally about .3 or .4 lower than in other majors, but not so much in architecture.

GRE's don't matter so much for engineering...You should get a perfect score or close on the quantitative to even be considered.

If you can do well at Michigan in the engineering minor you stand a better chance, but you will have to take some of the more challenging courses in structural theory. Make sure you really want to do it.

GPAs are pretty dubious at best these days, but will help give them a rough idea of where you are. Even within an engineering college, the average GPAs will vary wildly between disciplines (partly on the type of students they attract, partly on the difficulty of material). At graduation, I think ours ranged from 3.8 for Industrial Engineering (we called it imaginary engineering because it was a joke) to around a 2.8 for biochem (extremely difficult). A 3.7 in Arch isn't terrible, but at the same time it really can't be compared directly to an engineering discipline (even AE).

The most important thing is probably your transcript and academic/ professional lineage (like in architecture for the latter). If you have a transcript of what amounts to mostly basketweaving, you are going to have a difficult time getting looked at. If you worked for a reputable firm doing technical work, you can make a much better case for needing the MS.

With that said, my boss on the engineering side is a brilliant structural engineer that was an english major for his undergrad and first graduate degrees. He decided it wasn't his gig, took the prerequisites, then got into MIT for his MS - SE. So it can certainly be done, and you can certainly end up at at a top firm if you pursue the SE side. 

You can't bullshit math/ science/ technical courses- so get in touch with the faculty and see what they recommend taking. And do well in those courses.

I did a bachelors and masters in engineering simultaneously- the single biggest piece of advice that I can give you is to learn how to articulate what you do not understand. Knowing what you do not know is one of the most important skills to have in engineering. It will help you key in on what areas to reinforce in the prerequisite courses you are about to take.

You will also find the content itself is frequently not impossible- it is just a matter of how much time you are willing to put in. I think having an architecture background and familiarity with working very long hours will serve you well in this regard.

I think more programs like this should exist- hedging your bets on the feast or famine lifestyle of architecture with an engineering background is very wise. It has served me well, given me a reason to exist in my firm, and can save you in a rough economy.

Thanks for the great replies, guys.  There was a lot of information I didn't know.

Ivasey - Applying for the program is actually through the Arch. school.  Indeed, the MS program  actually looks at everything you submit for application except for the portfolio.

Token AE - I agree with the GPA comments.  It's easier to get high marks in architecture than engineering, for sure.  I like to think it reflects well on how hard I worked though, because architecture school can be a total pain in the butt.

I question the application for holding both an MArch and MS in Structural Engineering...they are related but are in no way similar fields.  My wife is a structural engineer and her day at the office is VERY different from mine, SE's have faster project turn over rate than in an architecture office. The general structural design for a building is a minority of time they spend on a project and the rest of the time is spent on designing the detail connections using calculations and  expensive specialized software that you generally will never find in an architectural office. There aren't enough hours in a day to do both effectively and the people you work for aren't going to understand flipping back and forth.  Do you then plan on taking both the ARE and the SE Exams? 

My point is, if you are more interested in being an SE, the MArch is probably useless, it will just make you easier to talk to and more receptive to an architect's design intent. If you ultimately want to be an architect who has a sensibility about structure, you can do that without the overkill of the SE degree, just respect gravity & lateral loads.

There are several people who are currently completing the joint M Arch/MS in Structural Engineering degrees right now at here at Berkeley. Try to apply for one program and then make your way to the other is probably your best course of action, as receiving acceptances from two highly competitive programs requires a great deal of talent as well as luck. There are a lot of Michigan faculty/PhD students around Berkeley right now, including Tom Buresh, the Chair, and Danelle Guthrie. Knowing them would certainly help you out a bit. There are some portfolios that were admitted in the 'Post your Portfolio/Acceptances' thread that is floating around this forum, I would check there for comparisons.

Does anyone know of other similar dual degree programs at other universities?  I have an undergraduate civil engineering degree and have always wanted to do an M.Arch, so this sounds very interesting to me.  I have heard of dual degrees in undergraduate programs, but this is the first I have heard of such a graduate program.

I disagree with the comment that having both is useless. I am in the middle of IDP and am already EIT- I will be on track to get both.

My line of work focuses on rehabilitation, historic preservation, and new design. Depending on the state, those topics can sway from PE to RA/ AIA  territory (and vice versa) very easily. Especially when one relates to enclosures.

Having both may be less of a boon in design architecture or design engineering, but as a consultant and architect/engineer of record it will be invaluable.

I do not think that a MS in engineering is professional degree that would allow you to sit for exams right away, but I'm not sure you may want to check it out ...but sitting for the EIT/PE is not as big of a pain as the ARE in most states engineers can use work experience but you would have to ask the dept I am not an engineer

To my knowledge, you can't get a PE license with only an MS unless it's a professional degree accredited by ABET (in which case, I think it would be advertised as an MEng). 

That said, if you have an MArch, you would get a license in architecture anyways.  While it's pretty good to have degrees (and, thus, certified knowledge) in both, I would imagine that the value of having two different licenses would not be all that high compared to the process you'd have to go through for licensure if your undergrad isn't in engineering.

I think the knowledge, however, would be worth it (if you're into that kind of thing).  When you really know a technical subject very well and also have a design background, you can generally get much better results than if you only knew each of these things individually.

Also, as far as EIT/PE goes: most engineers I know took EIT towards the end of school, and their PE after a few years of working.  I believe you can sit for several PE exams over the course of your career, if you so choose (and are qualified).

Dividing EIT/PE in this way makes it less of a pain than the ARE, in my opinion; better to have some of the exam process done at the end of school and then only one test, as opposed to taking a whole mass of exams only after years of working.

ABET accreditation will vary from department to department. A mechanical engineering MS may not be accredited, but an aerospace engineering MS will. You will have to follow up with the department that you are interested in.

The difference between an MS and a M.Eng. degree in the engineering world is that MS degrees are research and coursework focused and require a research thesis (mini PhD), while M.Eng. do not. M.Eng. are also typically more focused- a good analogy may be the MDesS at the GSD (~M.Eng.) versus a M.Arch (MS).

The EIT is typically taken in the seventh or eighth semester of an engineering curriculum or after a certain amount of time working under an engineer. The PE and the ARE are more or less equal pains in the rear-the PE is mostly studying for one very complicated test, and the ARE is broken down much more. Both will take about the same amount of time from when you begin preparing to you are licensed- say a year for the middle 50% of takers.

Excepting CA, you will be required to work for 4 years (3 if you have a grad+ undegrad engineering degree) prior to taking the PE exam. In CA you can do 3 (2). It ends up being unlike the AREs in that you cannot take them right out of grad school, but at the same time the passing rate is approximately 75% for most exams.

The only reason that I am able to do both is that a large portion of the content on my PE exam is covered in much less detail on the AREs- so I can kill two birds with one stone.

Hello. I'm a current MArch II at UCBerkeley pursuing the MS in Structural. 

I will have to take the equivalent of a 'minor' in Structural, which I am currently pursuing (met some great undergrads in the architecture program this way!) then I will apply to the Masters of Science program which, assuming I make it to the finish line, will give me the opportunity to be a licensed Structural Engineer AND a licensed Architect. 

So far so good. I got an A on my first engineering course, so that will definitely look good on my application for the MS. As I understand, from speaking with the registrar of the engineering department, doing well in the minor classes are the most important aspect of the application from an MArch student.

It's a lot of work, as you have to maintain 12 credits enrollment in the architecture school in addition to whatever your current classes for engineering are, but there is no doubt in my mind that this is a good path. Not only professionally, but, in my opinion, an architect should understand how to build their designs in order to maximize artistic intention through understanding structural and material load capacities and the unfortunately reality of cost.

Contact me with any questions. 

mike? lol

Indeed, Leo.  Howya doing?

@JENIFER ,i have a B.Eng  in civil engineering 61%,and is doing M.Eng in structures presently , i m thinking of applying for march 1st prof degree in architecture ,will this degree help me to get a reputed program in us??i m from india my col is ranked around 22 in india ,will the coll rank matter,becuase most of my friends got in to uiuc,cmu,georgia tech etc,will score same as i have???

Hello!  I was wondering about the same question; however my background is a bit different.  I currently hold a BS in Mechanical Engineering (and had a minor in Architecture) and work at a large design firm doing HVAC/Energy Consulting.  I realized that I would be much more interested becoming an architect but don't think I had enough studios in my minor to create a large enough portfolio.  Is it possible to get into the MS Structural path first and apply to the M.Arch path later?  What do people on this site recommend I do?