Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc)
Pratt Institute
University of Southern California (USC)
Tulane University
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
Temple University
University of Oregon
Cranbrook Academy of Art
New York Institute of Technology (NYIT)
Kansas State University
Study Architecture with no intention of being an Architect
I'm in the stage where I need to decide what I'm going to study next year.
The question might sound weird. I've study Fine Arts most of my life and was truly attracted to design and architecture as well. In some point, I decided I want to study industrial design. Besides that, I do have a strong mathematical and analytical side as well.
I applied for a few design and architecture school this year, and got accepted to few of them. So I have the option to go either way.
I know I don't want to work as an architect. I'm interested in 3D design, spaces, material research, architectural features, and technology.
I don't know if I'm right, but I do see architecture studies as more science related, than ID studies. I don't know if it's a good idea to study architecture to become a more profound designer.
The relevant schools for design are Central Saint Martins, Design Academy Eindhoven, écal and IED (Barcelona).
And for Arch the Architectural Association is the only choice (primarily because of its profound and interdisciplinary nature).
Am I just over thinking it? Maybe the right choice is to study ID and then continue to MA studies not necessary in design?
Any insight will be much appreciated.
Ask yourself if you love designing things / objects or designing how buildings come together?
In terms of education:
ID > product oriented / process and materials oriented.
Architecture > product oriented / process and materials ignorant.
Bring it on, bitches.
You're talking about education in the US, and the statement seems correct (was it always this bad?) - but in the outer realms there are schools that include process and materials (and even plumbing, structural and mechanical systems) in their curricula - I personally had 2 semesters of professional practice before graduation, one in a building department and one building a chapel from scratch, including the seating benches.
My education was exceptionally material related... but that's because we shared facilities with the ID school so there was a great deal of cross pollination. Process was prevalent too.
Need to add, my bachelor's degree is 5 years of credits plus a final project you can complete in 3 years - I did the 5 years no problem, but then I started working and had to ask for an extension for another 3 years to get the degree (and license at the same time btw)
Lots of people study architecture and never work in architecture. They end up being artists, product designers, urban planners, interior designers, traffic engineers, graphic designers, and so on. Many schools will provide a broad education that will allow the graduates to work on somewhat related fields. Other schools will concentrate more on building design.
That said, architectural schools are very, very demanding in the amount of work that is required to graduate. So you have to think if you want to put up with the volume before you go out in the world and start working on your career.
Maybe the question should be - what kind of job do you see yourself doing after graduation? Go get a degree that makes you employable for the job you want.
Architecture school is a lot of BS to go through if you don't want to be an architect. Some people have mental breakdowns, gain weight, stop sleeping, etc., because it can be such a heavy workload. I never had a single panic attack before I started architecture school. There was an entire year where I only slept 4 hours per night and slept like 15 hours on the weekends. (Obviously all of that can be avoided with the right work ethic and frame of mind.) Just trying to say, it's no joke and shouldn't be entered into without thinking it through.
Thanks for all your answers.
I do see myself working as an industrial designer, creating and inventing, but within a broad spectrum of objects and features, and not just "classic" product designing.
The reason I consider study Arch is because I somewhat see the education in this field to be more thorough and integral than the ID one, which in some school sometimes feel solely aesthetically driven. It's more important to me to develop my thinking process and broaden my horizons, than being in a school that "just" teach technical skills. That the main reason I only considering the AA school in London that's considered to be very conceptual with a hands-on approach.
Zbig and thatsthat - what you've stated is one of the reasons I feel Arch studies are more thorough. Why don't they "warn" you from design studies?
Maybe the right decision is to study ID and then continue to master studies in design. I'm pretty clueless about it.
The architecture profession has a long held obsession with making the next generation pay their dues. We’re still fighting unpaid internships.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.