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
UPenn’s MS AAD VS SCI-Arc’s MArch ii
Hello Everyone, Recently got accepted into SciArc’s MArch ii (2 years) & Upenn’s MSAAD (1 year) and I’m very confused between them.
As I’ve been working since 3 years, I believe I’ve lost my creative skills doing all the technical stuff and need a new approach to design and develop my creative thinking and design methodology , while also learn some technical stuff about the advanced fabrication & execution processes to execute the designs irl.
I’m almost convinced that Penn will be a better choice but since it’s for a year I believe that it won’t be enough for me to develop that style and also i think that the more time I spend in school the more i will learn.
I also wanted to know if they have some technical aspects in AAD. And fabrication opportunities except the robotic fabs.
And which school will get me jobs in better offices? (I don’t have a preference between east or west coast)
and what can I expect my starting salary to be?
I believe only SciArc is NAAB accredited which is the only thing that matters. Expect to spend well above $60k usd per year on tuition and be happy to earn 40k per year working 60hr weeks afterwards.
But why is it necessary/preferred to go with a NAAB accredited course if i want to work in the US?
Haha this issue of overwork & less pay is everywhere
Only accredited degrees lead to license. Everything else is a waste of time and money unless your goal is to stay in academia.
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.