This is kinda steered towards those working in offices already that maybe have hiring status in a variety of firms. I'm more so just curious what others think..
Obviously most people know the general knowledge taught in arch school isn't practice related but just conceptual design thinking And I've read before how people say 'cheapest, quickest route' to get out and start working but is this always the best route? Most of the real training happens post-grad in an office but is there something that makes specific newbies standout when you are doing the hiring? Even more specific than simply their portfolio.
Many schools are phasing out the 5th year professional degree in the us over the next several years, (so I've heard from a few already including my own from a while ago.) (probably as a marketing technique to make more money)
Would you say there are cases where the fastest and cheapest route to graduation isn't the best? Does the school you attend give you more opportunities vs others. Say going through a 4+2 at the same school vs 4 at one and +2 at a different school have any variances in getting hired other than more networking pools? Or is the educational choices just as meaningless/random as the curriculum itself? lol (obviously the masters degree is overkill right now, but it seems advantageous to go ahead and do this route immediately following undergrad if 5th year becomes irrelevant.. but just wondering if any of this is even relevant at all.
This question has been covered hundreds of times - you might want to search older threads for more takes on it.
You covered the main advantage of the shorter program: a year less of tuition, and a year more of earning potential.
Pros of the 4+2 route: you covered some of those too. Yes, of course there are more networking opportunities if you attend two different universities for your undergrad degree and M.Arch. Yes, some employers prefer students from particular schools (some prefer grads from their own alma mater, some prefer grads from schools with internship or co-op requirements, or schools with mandatory building projects, or Ivy universities, or programs they consider more technically oriented - firms' preferences are endless.) For some types of students the financial aid package will work out so much better for grad school than for undergrad (usually because of the way that parents' finances factor in, or don't) that the longer M.Arch route ends up costing substantially less than the 5th year of a B.Arch. You might get a broader college education from a 4+2 program because most allow more electives than 5-year professional programs. You might benefit from attending 2 different programs with 2 different points of view.
Many universities have phased out their B.Arch programs over the last 30 years - but many others have held onto them - they're not unusual and not likely to become extinct very soon. About 20 years ago NAAB was moving toward phasing out accreditation for all of them, but that move was abandoned, so there's no particular reason to think that the 5th year of a B.Arch is less or more "relevant" than any other year or degree route.
The reason for phasing out B.Arch programs is to better align with international standards, in particular the Canberra Accord - in many countries, the M.Arch is the first professional degree, and it is required for mobility within the EU.
Personally, if I were hiring, I would be most impressed with someone who did their bachelor's in architectural technology or some other program more technically focused than design focused, then did an IPAL M.Arch at a reputable design school.
school and life are not so direct or predictable. good design is worth something, good work skills are worth something, good character is worth a lot. good schools will expose you to all of these in varying amounts; but only you can make it meaningful. some people pick up how architecture works quickly in a middling environment- others spend a long time in great schools and famous firms but never really get it.
so, um, it depends. a good plan of action is go somewhere you can afford and find interesting things to study. it really will work out, or at least offer the possibility of working out, so long as you don't make stupid major mistakes. careers are very forgiving and open ended.
Jun 27, 19 9:52 am ·
·
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.
Young architects
This is kinda steered towards those working in offices already that maybe have hiring status in a variety of firms. I'm more so just curious what others think..
Obviously most people know the general knowledge taught in arch school isn't practice related but just conceptual design thinking And I've read before how people say 'cheapest, quickest route' to get out and start working but is this always the best route? Most of the real training happens post-grad in an office but is there something that makes specific newbies standout when you are doing the hiring? Even more specific than simply their portfolio.
Many schools are phasing out the 5th year professional degree in the us over the next several years, (so I've heard from a few already including my own from a while ago.) (probably as a marketing technique to make more money)
Would you say there are cases where the fastest and cheapest route to graduation isn't the best? Does the school you attend give you more opportunities vs others. Say going through a 4+2 at the same school vs 4 at one and +2 at a different school have any variances in getting hired other than more networking pools? Or is the educational choices just as meaningless/random as the curriculum itself? lol (obviously the masters degree is overkill right now, but it seems advantageous to go ahead and do this route immediately following undergrad if 5th year becomes irrelevant.. but just wondering if any of this is even relevant at all.
This question has been covered hundreds of times - you might want to search older threads for more takes on it.
You covered the main advantage of the shorter program: a year less of tuition, and a year more of earning potential.
Pros of the 4+2 route: you covered some of those too. Yes, of course there are more networking opportunities if you attend two different universities for your undergrad degree and M.Arch. Yes, some employers prefer students from particular schools (some prefer grads from their own alma mater, some prefer grads from schools with internship or co-op requirements, or schools with mandatory building projects, or Ivy universities, or programs they consider more technically oriented - firms' preferences are endless.) For some types of students the financial aid package will work out so much better for grad school than for undergrad (usually because of the way that parents' finances factor in, or don't) that the longer M.Arch route ends up costing substantially less than the 5th year of a B.Arch. You might get a broader college education from a 4+2 program because most allow more electives than 5-year professional programs. You might benefit from attending 2 different programs with 2 different points of view.
Many universities have phased out their B.Arch programs over the last 30 years - but many others have held onto them - they're not unusual and not likely to become extinct very soon. About 20 years ago NAAB was moving toward phasing out accreditation for all of them, but that move was abandoned, so there's no particular reason to think that the 5th year of a B.Arch is less or more "relevant" than any other year or degree route.
The reason for phasing out B.Arch programs is to better align with international standards, in particular the Canberra Accord - in many countries, the M.Arch is the first professional degree, and it is required for mobility within the EU.
Personally, if I were hiring, I would be most impressed with someone who did their bachelor's in architectural technology or some other program more technically focused than design focused, then did an IPAL M.Arch at a reputable design school.
It depends...so just figure out what you’d want to do and choose your path accordingly.
school and life are not so direct or predictable. good design is worth something, good work skills are worth something, good character is worth a lot. good schools will expose you to all of these in varying amounts; but only you can make it meaningful. some people pick up how architecture works quickly in a middling environment- others spend a long time in great schools and famous firms but never really get it.
so, um, it depends. a good plan of action is go somewhere you can afford and find interesting things to study. it really will work out, or at least offer the possibility of working out, so long as you don't make stupid major mistakes. careers are very forgiving and open ended.
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.