So you've done no research on this at all then?

The 3/3.5 year programs are for students without undergraduate degrees in architecture. The 2 year programs are for students with a 4-year, non-professional degree.

You don't strike me as graduate school material though.

• "i want something quick lol"
• "i'm just seeking a masters"
• "is a professional bachelors as valuable as a masters degree"

Who are even you? yes Ive done my research that's why I'm asking! Do you know most of the "top not" architecture schools are only 3yr programs regardless if you have an undergraduate in architecture: Colombia, Harvard, MIT, Cornell, UCLA, Pratt, Rice, Yale, University of Michigan and many more.

maybe i should rephrase this, my question really is if theirs a difference from a 2yr and 3yr program, you get a masters either way but why a year difference?

In what degree program do they finally teach how to write; including spelling (not spellcheck) grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, and coherent development?

This is utterly lacking in a large segment of the school age population, exacerbated by texting, I'm sure.

^ and basic  research skills.

Ladies and gentlemen, our best and brightest.

Who am even I?! No you haven't done your research that's why you're wrong, of coarse!

I'd make fun of the "top not" thing but I haven't the foggiest idea what the fuck you're trying to say there. But let's have a look at that list. Spending five minutes on the school websites, here's what I found:

"Colombia": 2 years

Harvard: 2.5 years

MIT: 2.5 years

Rice: 2.5 years

Michigan: 2 years

Cornell/UCLA/Pratt/Yale: unclear, but the websites imply that they only take non-architecture background students in the M.Arch I programs? Perhaps someone else can chime in on their actual advanced placement/course waiver policies, because I find that extremely hard to believe.

Edit: Oh. Texas Tech. This makes more sense now.

Thank you!

a bunch of assholes on this post.

Assholes on the internet? Where?

2.5 years of architectural education? Gee... That's a very very short period of time to even scratch the surface. I have no idea why anyone would want to spend less than 5 years studying something that requires years to master...

"I want something quick"... We got speedy gonzales here...

M.arch 2 (2 year Masters Program) - For those with a NAAB accredited B.arch degree. (if you do not know what this is you probably do not have this type of degree) 

M.arch 1 (3 year Masters Program) - For those with a non-accredited architecture degree or a degree in another field.

So YES there is a difference, the two year masters is tailored for those with more architecture education. But either way you should be taking 7 years. 5+2 for a accredited undergrad or a 4+3 for non-accredited degree.

^You are pretty off base.

Most 2 year degrees or even advanced placement in 3 year programs are meant for people with 4 year arch backgrounds. 3 year degrees (most of which actually include at least one summer and are thus not really 3 years) are typically meant for anyone with any background.

Most non-professional MArchs are 1-2 years.

Ultimately to become a professional it should take you:

5+0 years

4+2 years

4(nonarch)+3 years

@krisl0x3

You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. 

@natematt

Thank you for explaining that in a nicer way than I possibly could.

@natematt You're right about the 5 year. Thank you for correcting me. However I graduated with a 4 year degree but was still told to apply to 3 year programs for graduate schools. After attending open houses for many schools more than half the people I met had four year architecture degrees but were placed in the 3 year program. 

As far as the M. Arch 2 programs I still believe it requires a previous architecture NAAB accredited degree (typically 5 years). A four year non-accredited doesn't count (this is what I have). They do make exceptions but talking to the schools you want to apply to about your specific case works best.

@placebeyondthesplines you don't have to be so mean, I was just offering information AIAS, NAAB and my university has told me.

@krisl0x3

And displaying/spreading your ignorance of the extremely common 4+2 path to an M.Arch. Those sources did not give you the totally incomplete and inaccurate information you are doling out. 

You were told to apply to three-year programs because your critics didn't think you deserved advanced placement (a two-year M.Arch I). 

I'm not trying to spread ignorance I am just talking out of personal experience from applying to M. Arch 1 programs last year. I've read forums before applying and was told 4+2, but after applying and talking to faculty at different schools and other students 4+2 is not so easy to obtain.  

Qualification depends on school you are applying to and your background program. Some Bachelor of Arts in Architecture degrees will not qualify you for a 2 year professional grad program. However if you have a bachelors of Science from most schools you will have appropriate prerequisites for many of them, as well as advanced placement within 3 year programs. Some schools, mostly the Ivies, don't really like to give anyone advanced placement, presumably because they know you would sell your soul to go there so why shouldn't they take your extra money, not because you are unqualified. Anyway, most other schools are more lenient or considerate. Did you have a BA or shop at Ivies?

The programs you are talking about are not professional degrees, there is no professional degree that requires you to have a professional degree, that would be absurd. These programs, which may be any length a school wants as they have no requirements.

My personal experience contrasts yours, but my opinion is based mostly on a larger observation and general information. 4+2 is a pretty common thing.
 

The schools I applied to are Ivies and more of the top rated schools. My degree is a bachelors of environmental design, which the school I obtained it at calls an equivalent to a bachelors of architecture. Before I applied I did hear largely that I should be able to get into a masters that only required two years, but found that challenged when I applied. I appreciate your input @natematt, I see where you're coming from. 

My understanding of degrees:

1st professional degree Bachelor of Architecture: 5yr undergraduate degree.

1st professional degree M. Arch: 2.5~3.5 yr graduate degree w/o an accredited 4yr degree with a major in architecture (usually a B.S. with a major in architecture); many schools will give 'advanced standing' of a year or so IF they feel your undergraduate degree and your performance in that program warrants it (most often than not, they will expect a BS w/ major in architecture at a higher caliber program).  The length of program, therefore, is dependent on your background.

2nd professional degree M.Arch: 1~1.5 yr graduate degree for those with a Bachelor of Architecture (5yr degree) or a 1st professional M.Arch.

IF you already have a college degree, it would make sense to pursue a M.Arch. of one type or another.  If you're getting a professional undergraduate degree, then you won't need a MArch - but you MAY want to do it to explore ideas that you can't in an office environment.  If you are not getting a BArch, then the length of your graduate studies will depend on the school you get into and how good your portfolio/grades are - the graduate schools have a standard that they expect students to graduate with, some students may only need 2 yrs to get there, others may benefit from the full 3 or 3+summer or 3.5 yrs. (@ Yale it really depended on the individual, not the school you went to; sometimes work experience helped as well).

This process is extremely varied by person and experience, so I think it is good to acknowledge the whole range. At the same time, I want to be very clear that I think you are not the majority experience here. We should ask the OP what his background degree is.

Also, to actually address the OP's questions here.

There is no fundamental difference to how they are run. I think 3 year programs tend to be more introductive, but I don't think they are typically rudimentary and unfulfilling for people with a background. Of course, if you have had four year of architecture you will be in the same place as people with 0 years of architecture, and ultimately graduate with more than twice as much time spent as them, so you can form your own opinions on that.

Thesis/no thesis is just a decision by program, and has no general or direct relationship to the length of the program.

"My degree is a bachelors of environmental design, which the school I obtained it at calls an equivalent to a bachelors of architecture."

This is absolutely 100% false. No architecture school has ever told you that a BED is equivalent to a B.Arch. That would be stupid to the point of negligence.

@3tk

Close, but an M.Arch II is not a professional degree. It is a program of advanced study for students who already hold a professional degree (hence the "post-professional" designation). A professional degree is one that enables its holder to pursue licensure, which an M.Arch II does not.

*A Bachelor of Science in Architecture. My bad @placebeyondthesplines. Thank you for catching every mistake I make. You're the best!

@kayl0 (formerly @krisl0x3) 

I doubt I'm catching them all. 

A 3.4 GPA (yikes), from the University of Hawaii (not exactly known as a quality school), piss-poor GRE score, and a mediocre portfolio will generally not get you advanced placement anywhere.

In another thread you said you only applied to L.A. schools (and didn't get into Sci-ARC?!). Are you confused about what an Ivy is or are you lying to make your bullshit sound more credible?

LOL. @placebeyondthesplines. You are such a troll. 

From your own post:

- Age: 22 | Sex: Female | Citizenship: USA

- Undergraduate degree: Bachelors of Environmental Design, 2015

- GPA: 3.4

- Portfolio: issuu.com/krisl0x3

- GRE scores: 149/154/4

- # of letter of recommendations: 3 letters - 2 professors, 1 former employer (All principals of their firms)

SCHOOLS applied + Results + Funds awarded: All programs are M.Arch 1 

- IN

 UCLA (awarded fellowship for 1 year)

 USC (awarded fellowship for all 3 years)

- OUT

- WAITLIST

- NO RESPONSE

SCI-Arc

-PREFERENCE/TIPS 

I applied to schools in L.A. because its where I want to work after I finish graduate school and its close to home..ish (I'm from Hawaii). My GRE scores weren't that strong and I didn't have time to take the test again so I knew I had to make up in other areas. I think my letter of recommendation helped a lot because they were well known and well respected architects. As of now I am pretty set on attending UCLA.