Why architecture if you:

A. Have low grades

B. No portfolio

 

With that said, UofT will accept almost anyone anyways and canadian tuition is dirt cheap compared to the US.

SciArch has an 80% acceptance rate and will pretty much take anyone if they have the big dollars to pay for it. (I know I was shocked too when I heard this number https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=sci-arc%20acceptance%20rate).

 

I know some plenty talented folks who have came out of SciArc, but if you aren't one of them I dont think the school will fair you well. Where do you want to practice? I went to the AA and you could also very well get in there because they're similarly prone to accept weaker students to help bolster funding (they basically don't have an endowment, and it doesnt help that some IT bloke made off with 10 million pounds of stolen monies several years back). 

But if you want to practice in Canada/US, I would highly suggest broadening your scope outside of the UK. I wouldn't call Pratt a safety if you have poor grades and a weak portfolio. What about schools like UT Austin, Illinois Institute of Technology, University of Oregon, University of Washington, and University of Cincinnati? All aren't in the "ivy" league caliber but definitely are up and coming.

Thanks for your opinion, though I never mentioned that I have a weak portfolio...(or no portfolio.. )

So my question is, that is there any other institute of architecture (like Sciarc and AA),that has a good reputation, but not a "University" or "Art School"?

Thanks.

Agree with University of Cincinnati because it’s easy to get into and is a co-op. Someone with moderate grades needs to add work experience to their resume at graduation, which will supplement any shortfall. Been a lot of great architects that went to UC, including Michael Graves, Michael Bierut of Vignelli Associates (now at Pentagram), Erik Sueberkrop of Studios Architecture, Dick Blinder of Beyer Blinder Belle, and a lot of firm owners in the region, don’t sell it short.

Why don't you want to go to a "University"?

Cuz I have already been in an university environment for four years, I would like to try something different and unique, like AA and Sciarc.

^then check your spam folder. There must be a few diploma mill joints if something different is what you're looking for.

Second to that, architecture schools are not typical university programs. I feel you should be already aware of this. It's not a matter of attending a few classes and writing multiple choice exams.

For the record: okay portfolio generally = weak. Post some examples and perhaps some here can help cross out places where your background will not fit. Without anything else to go on, I'll stick to my last point from earlier. Do the 3 year UofT. It's not worth wasting $200k on an Ivy degree in this field.

What do you think is the big difference? Professional schools largely exist independently of their larger universities, except they have more money than stand alone skills. I promise that university to university, there is uniqueness. You don't need to limit yourself to stand alones.

U of T (M.Arch1) *cuz it's in Canada and cuz Frank Gehry is an alumni xP

Thank you guys.

To be honest, I kinda do care about the reputation of the school and I believe it will affect my future career path if I were return to Canada. I would love to go to any of the first tier Universities but unfortunately I did not do well in my psychology major,so the GPA is the barrier for me. A professional architecture school sounds pretty interesting in some way, and also not affected by the ranking system.

Another thing is the location, I would prefer schools in coastal cities like LA or NY, and I heard generally they have profs shared from school like Columbia.

Same situation as you with a low GPA and will have a low GRE. I have heard that the portfolio is a significant factor,so I don't care too much about both(maybe I should pay more attention on the TOEFL).

If you apply AA Diploma(undergraduate), the difficulty is same as lvy, although they have different style to measure the students.UCL is a university and they see academic performance very important.Pratt actually is a traditional school in architecture, I don't think they will agree with the idea and educational style in Sci-arc or AA.

 

What I mean is if you consider AA diploma, you should add fist tier architecture schools in your list.

Thank you Steven, seems like your view of AA is somewhat different than others (many people say that AA is not difficult as long as you can afford the tuition).

Anyone knows anything about University of Washington in Seattle? Is the architecture program good there? Thanks!

U wash Seattle is not Ivy. But it's in a beautiful city. Regarding your portfolio, make sure it shows evidence of process and independent thinking. If it's all sexy renderings, which I like as much as everyone else, it's still generic.

Thanks Rob, I found UW does have a good location and it's close to Vancouver.Actually, I just thought about UW today and rarely I can find anyone talking about the architecture program of this school, so I'm wondering would anybody know about the program, and is it difficult to get admitted? Thanks.

It is hard to say AA is good or not. Because it is ture they are lacking of money and facilities. They begin to think fabrication and 3D printing so many years ago,but today they still just thinking and ETH, GSD or MIT have some great improvements in both. The tution in AA is so expensive, so the talented students in UK will go to UCL ,and then almost all students in AA come from orther countries.

How difficult to get in? it is depend on which programme you apply. If you apply graduate programmes, it is so easy, becuase there are not so many talented students compete with you. Almost all excellent graduates from BA in UK will apply trasfer to 4 or 5 years in diploma, thus  the 5 years diploma means undergraduate+graduate.

If you go to open day( I guess in the Octorber like last year), you will find the portfolios which get in are so normal. But they have interview to hear your working and thinking. Only few people could get the offer after interview. All the students I know in AA are talented, or we could say gifted, maybe are not excellent. I know some guys in the Cornall.They are typical good students, but you could see they are designs during the Cornall are so normal. Maybe they do a good job and have perfect performance in the academy. When I see the student in AA, intruducing his work and show his A1 portfolio, I feel" oh god, how the people can fucking think like that?" I know some guys in the first year who have writed own books or theories or graduated from 4 years architecture programmes in the USA. So you will compete with them. Do you think you have gift in the architecture? or you only do a good job?

Jesus Christ.

where do you want to live?  I suspect a AA degree will be way less useful than a Sci-Arc degree if you want to live in LA, same with a UT degree if you want to live in Toronto. 

BTW, psychology is usually a super easy degree, what makes you think you can do well in architecture?