Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc)
Pratt Institute
Tulane University
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
Temple University
University of Oregon
Cranbrook Academy of Art
New York Institute of Technology (NYIT)
differences between B.arch, and M.arch/should I get a B.arch or M.arch?
Hello, I want to become a standard architect and was wondering, should I should get a B.arch or a M.arch? From what I have read a B.arch is a degree you can get without another degree, where as M.arch requires another degree. But I have also read the B.arch is the only degree that qualifies you as an architect, while a M.arch is for someone who helps architects like a construction manger.
The first part of your paragraph is correct. The second part makes no sense whatsoever. How much research have you actually done? Have you even done a search in the forums?
The only thing you need is an accredited degree which will vary depending on your location. B.arch are accredited bachelor degrees but few are left outside of the USA. M.arch are accredited master degrees and are becoming the defacato path for most who want to be licensed architects.
is their any difference between a B.arch and M.arch post education?
not really as long as the degree is recognized by whom ever is in charge of accreditation in your area.
ah ok, thank you for the info.
Just remember, a degree in architecture is not worth 50k+ tuition debt.... it's not an investment.
If you're in the USA then your AXP hours are 3,740 hours if you have an accredited degree. This can be either a Bachelor's of Architecture or a Masters of Architecture. As Non stated, no accredited degree in architecture is work $50K
Schools typically charge much more for graduate courses - because they can. There is no limit on the amount of money you can borrow. I would look at five year programs and get it over with. My sense is that a lot of people in the Master's programs did not know what they wanted to major in in the first place (it happens to millions of students)
Go to naab.org and see if a five year undergraduate program is available in your state without the additional out-of-state tuition as well.
My sense is that many undergraduates have a degree, and then decide to get another. The real trap, and a fucking criminal sin in my book, are the Architecture programs that are 4+2, or 4+3. The creators of these programs should be tried.
As others have posted.... The B.Arch and M.Arch programs (within the united states) are both accredited professional degree programs. You have two options for educational paths to licensure:
1. Do the 5-year B.Arch program; this is a bachelor professional degree (considered 1st professional by NAAB). Most B.Arch programs are design intensive, with programs often including 5 full years of design studios, as well as 3-5 years of structure and building systems courses.
2. Do the 2(?)-year M.Arch 1 program; you must already hold a bachelor degree in whatever you want (either a B.S. or B.A. of Architecture, non-accredited, or a B.S or B.A in some unrelated field). M.Arch 1 programs are often a more condensed version of the B.Arch.
They're often called either a 5-year track or a "4+2" track (because it's a standard Bachelor + the 2-year master.
If you want to teach, go get the M.Arch degree, as the B.Arch alone will not let you qualify to teach at most (all?) universities. Otherwise, if you already have a B.Arch, you can go back for an M.Arch 2 (considered 2nd professional degree), which will allow you to teach.
Ultimately, if you don't have a bachelor's yet, I'd do the 5-year instead of a 4+2 program, as you're ultimately spending less money and time in school. If you already have a B.S or B.A in something else, go straight on to M.Arch 1.
B. Arch or M. Arch, they're all B.S. to me.
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.