Archinect
anchor

Accepted to SCI-Arc and USC but not UCLA. Is it worth re-applying to UCLA next year and pass SCI-Arc & USC?

pinkjotto

Big question for me. Please advise:

Out of the schools I have applied to for M Arch, these are my top 3 schools of considering... and out of the 3, UCLA is my first interest...

- If I get accepted to SCI-Arc and USC but not UCLA. Is it worth re-applying to UCLA next coming year and pass SCI-Arc & USC accepted admissions?

Please advise!!

 
Jan 31, 21 3:14 pm
deathbydesign

Did you get any funding/scholarship offers from SCI-Arc and USC? I wouldn't pass that up if you did, especially from USC. Actually, with or without funding/scholarship, USC is a great school and has a competitive architecture department and programs. They have more programs leaning to different areas/disciplines which implies a greater network in terms of knowledge and student diversity. They're synonymously at par with UCLA and UC Berkeley (where the best architecture programs are on the west coast, particularly in California in my opinion anyway) in terms of faculty and facilities, and even some of the east coast giants. Otherwise, if you feel that you would jive more with UCLA's pedagogy and environment, then reapply by all means. 

But it also depends on what kind of education you want out of these schools. Definitely go for SCI-Arc if you're going for the more experimental route. Still, in terms of having that balance between the abstract and the pragmatic, and what having those and how it will prepare you for licensure and the broader job market, USC or UCLA is your best option. 

Feb 4, 21 8:50 am  · 
 · 
pinkjotto

Thank you so much again, deaethbydesign. Yes, I am definitely leaning more to UCLA because of just like you wrote. But one more question; you seem to not pass on USC, does USC have a good M.Arch program?

 · 
deathbydesign

I'm going to copy what I already wrote in the first paragraph for you: Actually, with or without funding/scholarship, USC is a great school and has a competitive architecture department and programs. They have more programs leaning to different areas/disciplines, which implies a greater network in terms of knowledge and student diversity. They're synonymously at par with UCLA and UC Berkeley (where the best architecture programs are on the west coast, particularly in California in my opinion anyway) in terms of faculty and facilities, and even some of the east coast giants. If you check the MArch Application Threads of this forum, you'll find many of those accepted to USC choose it over other California schools/MArch's, even SCI-Arc and UCLA. USC has always been reputable (with alumni such as Thom Mayne, Frank Gehry, Paul Revere Williams, etc.). Faculty and facilities wise also seem to be catching up with what SCI-Arc and UCLA are offering. UCLA teachers also teach at USC and vice versa.

 · 
pinkjotto

(Yes, I meant particularly for M.Arch, if you knew. And sorry me new to Archinect.. so trying to get familiar but still very new.) Got it. Thank you so much for your helpful response. Noted on the USC. Will see how the decisions come out in the next month or two.

 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: