Hi there,

I'm an international M.arch applicant, recently admitted to the school above.

Recently, I've been through hard times to choose which school to go, since those are all very different programs. My interest is more to practice architect, rather that pure academia. Here's my thought: (Some of them are just my assumption, since I'm an international.. advices would be much appreciated!)

UCLA (1 yr M.arch ll)

- Big city, big market, maybe one of the best place for job opportunities.

(I've worked in LA-based architecture firm's overseas branch office for 2 years, so I already have a little bit of network in LA. Hope this would help future job opportunities..)

- takes the shortest time, which means less burden on budget but high risk on qualification for job searching

- NAAB accredition X

U of Michigan (2 yrs M.arch)

- As far as I know, It can provide me with a quite good network around the world as well as in the states.

- It seems provide quite good balance between research-based architecture and practice-based architecture.

- Opportunities open to Chicago.

- NAAB accredited

- Requires ridiculous amount of budget without financial aid.

UT Austin (2 yrs M.arch ll w/ historic preservation focus)

- I've been interested in historic preservation studies, in terms of academic perspective. (which doesn't seem to be really beneficial when applying for a job of design firm.)

- Opportunies open to Dallas-Houston area.

- Requires the least budget.

- NAAB accredition X

I know these are all very different program so the most important factor for making decision is up to my interest. But I just wanna ask you guys to give me advice and insight from different perspective.

Thank you in advance!