Yes, this matches my research of CU Denver and want to avoid CU Denver at all costs. Montana State sounds like it would be a great option with an accredited 5 year masters. What would you think about going to CU Boulder for their Environmental Design degree and trying to graduate from that program in 3 years and doing a 3 year masters program if I am unable to transfer into an accredited program at a school such as Montana State? Trying to have as many options as possible.

I am aware of the differnt paths towards a licensure but feel that from what I have learned an accredited degree is very beneficial. I mostly want to know what an accredited degree will offer that a non-accredited program will not.

"Need" and "should get" are similar but not identical.

You "should get" an accredited degree.

Wow that is actually extremely affordable even for the out of state costs if I am unable to receive the in state price as part of the Western Undergraduate Exchange program. I assume housing would be pretty affordable in Montana State as well. MSU looks like it could be the best option for me as I continue to receive more responses.

a room in bozeman will run about 500 dollars, and a single bedroom apt. will be about 1k. the rental market is a clusterfuck and supply is far below demand, so if you decide to move plan accordingly and start looking early. otherwise, living expenses are cheap, skiing is great and trout are abundant.

I am aware of the WUE program but unfortunately it is not offered on the main campus at ASU and additionally not offered for architecture. WUE is somewhat misleading as it is mostly offered for less popular degree programs. Luckily I earned healthy scholarships from ASU that actually make it more affordable than my in state options and even more due to high housing costs. Not sure I would qualify for MSEP as a Colorado resident, but I will look into it. I am not completely opposed to attending a non WUE school if it is accredited as it would help even out the total costs of schooling if it can reduce the years in a masters program.

I went to OSU, my sister did KSU and their 5 year programs. Just fyi; You still get charged graduate level out of state tuition for that 5th year and for most, it still takes 6 years.

have you gotten your license through experience yet rick? you sure you understand how the process works? i know for certain how a 4+2 program works, because that's the degree path i took. didn't have to make any guesses or assumptions, just showed up and walked out with a couple degrees.

Agreed. Rick, there is "technically possible" and reality. I know of only a handful who have successfully become licensed without an accredited degree. For those, that is all ancient history that happened in the early '80's and involved lawsuits and became Colorado "X" licenses. Since then, I know of no one who's successfully navigated the route you suggested. I do know of a few who got licensed in a different country and became architects here, but even then, most still had massive red tape to go through and it took years. I know how the 5 year program works and the 4+2.

Rick, there may be people out there who don't know about all the alternatives. However, the main reasons more people don't do the alternatives aren't that they don't know about them. They are:  1. the alternatives limit future mobility.  Some states don't accept some alternate routes.  This is still true even with alternate ways to become NCARB certified.  I have several colleagues who are very sad now, 10 to 20 years into their careers, that they severely limited their options by the choices they made about their educations when they were 19.  The state in which we do most of our projects does not accept alternate routes.  2.  It limits employability and can make it tough to even get a foot in some doors.  You yourself stated just a few days ago that the reason that you haven't been able to find a singe job in a firm near you in the past decade is that they all want people with B.Archs or M.Archs.  3. Alternate routes usually take longer, and that can limit lifetime earnings.  That is a different equation for each person, because it needs to be balanced against lost earnings while in school, as well as against tuition, but staying an unlicensed intern (or whatever it's called these days) for longer usually means staying at lower salaries for longer - which means you hit your "prime earning years" later, which means you spend fewer years in them.  

Some may not be informed. I think most of us were in fact very well informed and chose, with a healthy amount of deliberation, to take the route that gave us the most long-term flexibility. I know that in my undergrad program (4 year non-professional architecture major) we were all given a handout during registration in our sophomore years (the year that we entered our majors) specifically explaining all routes to licensing, including: no degree; 4+2 M.Arch track; 4 only, followed by experience; B.Arch; etc.  Maybe I can find it and scan it for you, to illustrate that it absolutely is not a "secret".  

  You're not a good advertisement for alternate routes.  They've gotten you stuck for more than a decade now.  You can't get experience because you don't have the prerequisite education - that illustrates one of the limitations of those routes.

A lot of architecture schools do have the information about various licensing paths right on their websites. As for informing students in their freshman years: isn't that a little ridiculous? Most students haven't chosen majors by that point - so are you expecting the universities to inform students of every possible licensing path for every possible career path? i.e. the schools are supposed to give students a book that lays out all licensing options for everything from architects to pharmacists to mortuary cosmetologists? It's up to students to research the careers they're considering - and there's no shortage of information for prospective architects. Everyplace from the AIA to NCARB to the state boards has all of the options - as do various "so you want to be an architect" books. Besides which, the OP already stated he's aware of the various paths.  There is not big conspiracy to keep this information secret - it's just that most people recognize that the alternate routes aren't the best routes for establishing the best long-term flexibility, employability, and career trajectory.

You're a good example of the potential wasted earning years associated with alternative routes.  You've frittered away over 15 years in which you could have been establishing a career, if only you'd been able to get a job.  At this point there's no practical reason that anybody would want to partner with you, so the only way you're going to get any experience is as an entry-level drafter at age 37 or whatever.

Disclaimer; totally from memory and I'm unsure how much is urban legend versus fact. The lawsuit I was referring to goes back to when CU Boulder had a accredited degree, then lost it. A whole group of graduates and those who were deep in the program suddenly found themselves with a worthless degree. To add insult, at that time there was no accredited degree available from any college in CO. So these students got very active politically very fast, found someone to sponsor a lawsuit and won against the State and the licensing board. If memory serves me right, they also had to add back in the experience route to achieve eligibility to take the ARE (which had been stripped in favor of only accepting NCARB certifications).

Oh... I also think it went pretty high up in the courts and has something to do with why most States still allow something like 10 years of experience being equivalent. Basically part of it I think had to do with a for-profit corporation (NCARB) being a monopoly having lone authority to decide who can practice and who cannot; generally not allowed by most State constitutions. So the experience thing is a governmental recourse so they can just point to alternate routes. It's probably also why NCARB has other methods; So States can say they provide other ways to become licensed and still maintain some sort national standard.

Rick I have taught in several B.Arch programs. Most of them don't even admit students into the architecture major until the end of their freshman year. They have a little "meet the majors" program, where students visit different departments over the course of a couple weeks, and at the end they decide which major to select - or if it's competitive then which ones to apply to. The way it works is that they do the regular first year foundation courses, and in the spring of freshman year they submit a departmental application. In some programs it's a pretty sure thing that anybody who wants to be in the major gets in, while in others it's competitive - basically like another application process once you're already in the university - and there are limited spots. There may be some 5-year programs that admit students directly into a studio sequence in their freshman year, but all of those with which I'm familiar just advise students on what typical liberal arts type coursework to take in their freshman year to target the major - for architecture the recommendations are typically for writing/composition, math and/or science courses, a freehand drawing or life drawing course, philosophy, art history, etc. There are many professions that have alternative routes to licensing. In some states it's still possible to become an attorney by apprenticing and passing the bar - with no higher education. In some states one can become a licensed psychotherapist by training with another licensed psychotherapist - no degree required. All one needs to do is a little research. But it can't possibly fall upon universities to tell every student every possible licensing route for every profession!

you know they send me an email every time someone replies to this......

You can turn that off. The link to turn off notifications is in all those emails that they send you....

Rick, I'm a faculty member in 2 B.Arch programs right now. I've taught in several others, and have been on admissions committees numerous times. I'm telling you from experience how this works in several schools. You can "doubt that" all you want, but it won't make you right. UO is one school - it has its processes, but those are not the same at every school. As for what you personally could do or want to do or whatever: part of your problem is all those years spent trying to pursue alternatives. You'd be eligible for grants and scholarships if you hadn't spent 10 years futzing around in community college earning Cs. You'd be eligible for loans if you hadn't used up all your years of eligibility without graduating. Think about it: all those architecture students you knew at UO graduated long ago, got jobs in the industry, and some are now licensed. Where have your alternatives gotten you other than in debt? Have you managed to find anyone who wants to partner with you? Have you managed to turn up any projects in Finland? Have you finished and sold any of the stock plans you said you were working on? Have you done anything at all? Hopefully prospective students who read these threads will see you as a good reason not to be you.

You're never going to do any of that. You're always "getting things together to [insert latest plan here]" but you never actually do anything ever.

Yes, I got mixed up but I am seeking out an accredited B. Arch program, my current program is a 4 year program and I feel that I should go to an accredited undergraduate program so I have that safety net of having an accredited degree. This would allow me to pursue a masters program if I would like to and if a masters in architecture is not in the cards due to finances or any other number of reasons I will already have an accredited degree to go directly into the industry.

Yes, that is another factor I am taking into account by going for an accredited B. Arch program I do not want to be burned out at the end of my undergraduate program with an unaccredited degree and not have the motivation to pursue a masters degree.