My current plan for my academic career is to continue my four year bachelors of geography and then apply for a masters of architecture. However I recently found out about a program at a technical institution that offers a 2 year architectural technology diploma where after graduating the diploma you can then transfer in to Griffith University in Australia to obtain a bachelors of architecture.
I am wondering what some of your guys thoughts are on this. I am hoping to eventually apply to a masters of architecture. The second option (with the diploma and transfer to Griffith) is much more focused on architecture, and would provide me with a bachelors degree I could fall back onto if I did not get into a masters.
So you want to compare a bachelors of geography and a masters of architecture on the one hand to an architectural technology diploma (below bachelors I presume) and a bachelors of architecture on the other? Seems like that first option would provide you with something to fall back onto (geography) and you will have a masters degree in architecture, win-win in my optics. The other option will not give you something to fall back onto really, all arch related, and will leave you with lower qualifications (with the possibility of being pigeonholed into the more archi-tech related stuff).
hard to say without knowing what the griffith program is like. I would tend to go with the griffith option. then work for a few years (2-3). then do a masters.
Looking for advice.
Hi there,
My current plan for my academic career is to continue my four year bachelors of geography and then apply for a masters of architecture. However I recently found out about a program at a technical institution that offers a 2 year architectural technology diploma where after graduating the diploma you can then transfer in to Griffith University in Australia to obtain a bachelors of architecture.
I am wondering what some of your guys thoughts are on this. I am hoping to eventually apply to a masters of architecture. The second option (with the diploma and transfer to Griffith) is much more focused on architecture, and would provide me with a bachelors degree I could fall back onto if I did not get into a masters.
Thanks,
Jonathan Walcot
So you want to compare a bachelors of geography and a masters of architecture on the one hand to an architectural technology diploma (below bachelors I presume) and a bachelors of architecture on the other? Seems like that first option would provide you with something to fall back onto (geography) and you will have a masters degree in architecture, win-win in my optics. The other option will not give you something to fall back onto really, all arch related, and will leave you with lower qualifications (with the possibility of being pigeonholed into the more archi-tech related stuff).
I think you should stay on the first option since you will have more chances for development.
hard to say without knowing what the griffith program is like. I would tend to go with the griffith option. then work for a few years (2-3). then do a masters.
i think you chances of getting into a really good architecture masters program are much higher if you go to griffith and work for a bit.
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.