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
Some advice for people considering architecture school
Some advice/perspectives for all those considering if/when/where to go to architecture graduate school right now. Most of these are based on things I have experienced or witnessed firsthand at my Ivy-league M.Arch program.
Did you just search the forum and assemble all of the typical responses?
Because if so, great job. We can just point to this thread when potential students inevitably ask those same questions for the 4 millionth time.
The median first year pay you provided is correct if you include large metro areas like NYC, San Fran, ect.
Excluding those 3-4 areas then the average first year pay is around $40k.
I don't know the US but that stood out to me as well as likely being quite high.
We're seeing entry level positions in the high 40's, low 50k's. There are people around us offering 40k but those positions either don't get filled or they settle for really marginal candidates.
really - Are you in a major metro area?
We're seeing entry level people for Denver in the $45 - $50k range.
We're not that far off from 45-50k. We are in a huge Texas city and also in a couple of tertiary markets in the deep south. We try to peg entry level salaries to something that keeps a person's rent to +/-25% of monthly take home pay. With even the most basic apartments running north of $1,100 per month right now in our locales, that means paying middle 40's to very low 50's.
That seem very noble of your firm. I'm glad they're doing that.
I think entry level interns with no previous experience are starting in the high $30K range here in GJ. Then again a two bedroom apartment is going for around $620 a month here.
Pivoting out doesn't seem particularly hard considering half my graduating class don't work in Architecture firms anymore. Outside of AEC jobs some other training/degree/certs will be needed, though that goes for any career changer.
Is wage growth really that bad in Architecture? I mean if we aren't looking at some of the real hot jobs out there, it seems like the first 10 years of your career the pay jump is pretty substantial, and then slows down unless you can find your way into the right management position. Still not nearly as bad as trade jobs or a lot of professional jobs where you're basically peaked a few years in (though you may make more than an architect at that point)
I don't know. In 2002 I stared at $28K. By 2010 that had doubled. Now I make in the low six figures. This includes profit sharing from stock options.
That's what I'm saying. at 7 years in I made double my starting pay. A few years later and it is still going on the same trajectory, though I expect it to slow down.
11. Put schools with co-op semesters at the top of your list.
RULE ABOVE ALL OTHER RULES:
Don't make major life decisions by inquiring from a bunch of anonymous individuals on an internet website as basing the decision on their opinion.
Yes, get off the internet and get a life and talk to people in person and talk to architects in person. Ultimately, assess the good, the bad, and the ugly of each career including architecture then decide objectively if this profession is right for you.
Anonymous people don't have obligation and are generally not held accountable because how can they really be accountable if you don't know who they are? Real people, real names, in person.
They will behave differently and in a more accountable manner because they can be held accountable. However, they don't have an obligation for your success. That is still on you. They do have an obligation to be... more or less truthful within reason.
As licensees, there is that obligation with every aspect of the profession so being truthful and candid is part of the obligation. However, they can't guarantee this career is right for you. You have to make that decision for yourself but remember, there is no such thing as a profession that is tailored to a person. Yet, a person can tailor their niche in the profession because a profession is bigger than any one person.
You will find with absolutely all professions have good, bad, and ugly aspects. In other words, all occupations have things liked, disliked, or more or less neutral. There is no occupation that a person will absolutely love every aspect of it. This is part of growing up and becoming an adult and leaving dreamland and into the real world and real life (warts and all included).
I don't want to dwell on this too much because there are too many variables but I'd assume $60k is what you should be aiming for after grad school. After undergrad I worked in that $40k - $50k range.
I disagree with point number 8 though. You should definitely go work for your favorite studio / spend time with those you admire if you're able to. First of all, it's a much better and often more exciting education than school. Also the disillusionment can be a good thing. You see that the best work is still done by a relatively young group of people and that should be empowering to you. The people might be wonderful or might suck which is also a good thing to learn. If you outgrow a place, move on and don't get stuck in a bad situation.
Just don't let clout chasing get in the way of investing in yourself and building your own future.
OM.. - did you work in large metro area with your undergrad?
OM... do not slave yourself to your favorite studio for unpaid work. That is not an investment.
Yeah, I worked in Chicago.
Also, to clarify- yes, never work for free or get yourself in debt for the "privilege" of working for someone's office. But if you can get in and get a decent wage a summer or even 1-2 year stint isn't a bad idea.
I also disagree with #8. It's good to realize what a scumbag and overrated certain people are (Eisenman). It's also refreshing to realize how amazing others are in person once you get to know them (Adjaye).
yup, too many lovely, talented, and accomplished people in this field to put up with assholes.
My starting pay BACK IN 2002 was $36,000 (which was considered to be a big deal back then). And yes now it is around $50,000. That is around 2% increase per year.
The average inflation over the last 20 years has been 3.6%
So yes, forget about thriving, this business is merely about getting by. Unless your partner makes real dough.
What position do you hold sameold? Are you licensed?
Im not talking about my pay now Chad, but starting pay for graduates...if I was making 50k after 20 years in this business, things would be way too sadder
That makes more sense. I started at $28k in 2002. I now make right around $100k. I own stock in the firm but I'm not a partner. It's all about the firm you work with.
It's not about just getting by.
My question still stands sameold . . what position do you hold at the firm you work with?
Not a partner, but pull around 130k after 20 years in the profession. Which, again, is not commensurate with inflation and living standards in a big city. 130k in a big city with family is, unfortunately just getting by...
And yes, licensed
Dang. That is unfortunate.
Making $130k and being sole provider for even a family of three would be tough. Add on living in a large city and you're in for even more of struggle.
My wife and I each make about the same. We don't have kids but I am a type 1 diabetic and that costs me around $12k year.
The city does not have it the hardest, at least the pay is high. My NJ suburb outside of NYC is the worst. 1 BR apartment rent is $2K due to all the people spreading out from NYC. Yet, architecture salary is still rural area average. Start salary for intern is around 50K. 50-75% of your check goes to rent.
Any large city / major metro area will have this problem. I'd think anyone in our profession would realize and understand this.
Yes, Chad, but you are making it sound like it is the individual's fault for not knowing that the rate of pay increase is so low. This should be something that is discussed in college and be made very clear. Sometimes there are extenuating circumstances that dont make it easy for both parents to be working in the family, but one would hope that with the amount of education and effort we put in, it would not be such a struggle frankly...
It was discussed when / where I went to school. Regardless I'm not blaming people for not knowing about pay rates in architecture. I am blaming people for choosing to work in major metro areas then complaining about the job market.
Also I wouldn't call a rate of pay increase of 3.5 to 4.0x over 20 years low. I think what you're unhappy about is that inflation is increasing faster than wage growth and wealth imbalance. This is happening to nearly EVERYONE in the US since the mid 90's, not just architects. I say nearly everyone because the top 3% are making more money than ever.
Sure, it is happening to nearly everyone, but there are not many professions that have such high fees and such a low starting salary. When the starting salary is so low and the 3-4% increase is based on THAT salary, it implies it will be low overall compared to the rest of the professionals.
And that's what this discussion is about - a super low starting wage, a super low rate of wage increase compounded with (usually) super high college fees. Yes you will tell me there are state schools to avoid the high fee, but shouldn't fancier colleges also be super honest to their students about this fact?
I also hate to lump us into the liberal arts willy nilly - most of us exist to make money for others - developers, home buyers etc, something that a art history major usually does not do.
If not addressed head on (like the OP is trying to do), is a "you should have known" conversation that keeps perpetuating.
And yes, as I grow older, the allure of a life in a smaller city seems very plausible, so I wont argue on that fact. City life seems more and more dumb as the years go by.
I haven't been in college for nearly 20 years so I can't comment too much on that aspect. I do know several recent graduates (within the last four years). It appears that good schools do inform students at what the current starting pay is and how much you can expect to progress. In fact AIA has freely available information on this available to students.
I do agree that higher education is ridiculously expensive.
I don't think architectural fees are high though. I think they should be higher. Clients constantly balk at a 7% fee when it should be more in the 8-9%
I’ve realized the pay information thing is a weird cultural blindspot. People in architecture literally don’t want to talk about money - whereas everyone in tech/finance/big law is
hyper aware of their own/peers’ compensation.
Saw this on Bloomberg:
In New York City, a $100,000 Salary Feels Like $36,000
After taxes and adjusting for the sky-high cost of living, a six-figure paycheck doesn’t take you as far you might expect.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
Very few college instructors in the US have enough work history in professional, for-profit practice to know anything about wage growth and careers. The schools are only hiring academic lifers.
Truth.
I must of been very lucky. All but three of my profs all had 20 plus years experience. I know my old school maintained that level of professor experience until 2018 when I checked last.
Thats great Chad. The "fancy" school that I attended years ago had a couple of starchitects that were actually building stuff but most others would do competitions etc only. The starchitects were gung-ho on how architecture does not pay and one needs to forgo everything else in life, and the others had no clue about real life.
To be fair it's up to you if you decide to agree with those 'starchitects'. Just like it's up to you to choose a good school to attend.
I do not agree. It is a greater responsibility for the deans of those fancy schools to hire real professionals and not a melange of stars & starfuckers. Unfortunately the culture is that of a bait-and-catch wherein the famous schools focus more on getting published in glossy magazines than actually building stuff.
I kind of agree with you.
It's up to the dean to get the best profs they can to teach. It's still up to the students to look at the college, it's reputation, and faculty to determine if it's worthwhile.
It's unethical for schools to do the 'bait-and-catch' style of attracting students. That's why it's important for perspective students to do their research.
Even better - it's up to the student while in high school to look into architecture. You'd be surprised how many schools have job shadowing programs. All but two of the firms I've worked with had job shadows throughout the high school year.
Yes, the fastest and least expensive route is to enter a 5-year BArch program after high school. Everything else is more time and money taken from the student with no extra earning power or status to show for it.
Having gone to a state school, where most of the tenured faculty were licensed professionals, I can say that they were generally the most boring, insipid hacks in the profession. The adjunct faculty were working professionals, had design based practices, and inspired critical thinking the tenured ones never could.
Personally, I don't think the pay is that bad. It is fairly comparable with other typical jobs. You can make 6 digit down the road. Of course, it is not comparable to tech, finance, healthcare, and law. The field is simply too small and competitive. Law of supply and demand.
But then again, when I think about some of the undergrad + grad degree holders spending 7 years on the useless art degree in debt without much actual knowledge to use in practice. Making wages similar to people with a high school diploma. It is kind of sad. I guess, the key is not to spend too much on a useless grad degree.
Even then I wouldn't spend too much on a 'useful ' grad degree. If you can find a BArch degree from an accredited school that's all you need. No degree in architecture is work $65k from any school. Period.
I would say that a Grad degree is more useful if one is looking into a specialization focus like Urban Design, Sustainability etc. Otherwise yeah not sure if one needs a grad degree really in this biz.
There are a lot of arch programs that don't allow you receive an accredited degree without getting an MArch though. I know my old school went from a five year BArch to a five year MArch right when I graduated. The curriculum didn't change other than your fifth year thesis was now a grad program. :S
@Jay1122 For
Almost all other professional services - law, consulting, finance, accounting, etc. - have much longer tails in terms of starting / eventual compensation.
Let's face it, pay in architecture is deplorable when you count the amount of school you have to get through, the amount of effort and knowledge it takes to design and coordinate a project, and the hours spent. I have friends who did a bachelors in communications and they make mid to upper six figures in an average job. Heck, the HVAC and plumber guy makes the same if not way more than an junior architect. All good points in the initial post. Be very careful what you get yourself into; do your research and ask questions.
The amount of school you have to get though is tough but it's not that bad compared to doctors, engineers, lawyers, nursing, ect. The hours spent on a project isn't an issue. The issue is that some firms want their staff to work unpaid overtime. Don't EVER do that. As for the HVAC / Plumber guy making just as much as a junior architect - you're right. That 'guy' will still be making the same amount in ten years while the jr architect should be making around 2-3x what they where.
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.