This is my first post here. I felt compelled to post here because I just can't take it anymore. I need some kind of answers or advice because I surely couldn't ask my co-workers. To start, I am an aspiring architect in the US. I currently hold an Associate's of Applied Science and a Bachelor's of Science in Architecture. I earned the former at a community college and I earned the latter at the state university I transferred to. While in school, I studied feverishly (not much different than anyone else I suppose) and earned academic honors each semester. I honestly felt great about myself. Now, it has been two years since I graduated and I do not feel compelled to return for my master's degree. I honestly feel like I have just started to live my life now that I'm out of school and I frankly do not want to go back. Moreover, I had gone to University during the Covid-19 pandemic, so it was a really isolating and dreary experience. I much prefer working and I have been employed at a firm that I really like for two years.
With that all said, I can't help but feel a sense of guilt that I only really have a Bachelor's of Science. Yes, I am applying for licensure in a state that permits an educational alternative, but I feel like I'm an underachiever or that I am inferior. But when I ask my co-workers who have their Master's about the program, they have told me that they felt they didn't learn anything and that it was more of the same from the undergraduate program. So these answers made returning to University even less compelling. Why would I complete a program that would cost so much money and take so much time to only learn not much of anything?
I had big dreams of studying abroad or better yet, working abroad, but honestly, I am not sure anymore. The problem just loops around, I do not have a Master's degree so I would not be taken seriously. On top of that, I'm old. I am 25 years old, that's the age most people graduate from a master's program. If I were to commit to a Master's degree, I would want to have a new experience. I do not want to retread old grounds or learn nothing (based on what my coworkers say)
Are there any other people who hold a Bachelor's and feel this way? I can't help but feel like people, especially those with higher education look down on me. At the end of the day, I just want to be a licensed architect, but I fear people may not see me as credible due to my limited credentials. What do you all think?
I remember the first day I arrived in a graduate program in Florence Italy. I called my (then) wife and she asked me what I thought. My answer was that the Gods don't reside in graduate school. I think you need more design experience. Oh yea and confidence.
You earned a BA and a BS at an accredited institution of higher learning and you are working at an architectural firm. It is time to ditch the imposter syndrome. You are part of the architecture profession.
I earned a BS in economics, worked in business for a few years and then went to graduate school for a M.Arch. That was the path I chose to get to being an architect (license) to make up for lost time.
However, it seems like you are accruing experience and more important an income, at an architecture firm. You should be documenting hours and experiences and you can still apply through the AXP program credentials to get you to your architect's license.
The professional schools are there to get you into the profession. You have achieved that. You should be seeking the route to getting your architect's license.
This is a profession that you don't become too physically crippled by old age to perform. Physically laborious jobs may have retirement at 65-70 and even then, most jobs sectors like contractors stop doing the heavy day to day labor of construction when they get into their 40s maybe 50s. Athletes retires from professional sports, often in their 30s/40s. Some, maybe into their 50s. By then, they just aren't physically able to be competitive. Contractors, it is usually move towards more managerial role than construction labor, this way, they don't die of a heart attack or something like that by the time they are 60 years old. Those jobs, a person has an expiration date. It is either so many years or by a certain age because even aging itself expires you from those types of jobs.
Our profession isn't very physically intensive. We are basically office workers for the most part aside from job site visits walking around the job site. This is a job we can do into our 90s. So if you are passionate about this profession, you don't retire from the profession. You are in it until you pass away or shortly before it when you are for medical reasons unable to and basically on the exit ticketing route into after life. Until then, as long as you are physically and mentally of capacity, you can work. Now, with computer tools, you can draw buildings even if your hands shakes. So you can do that and be in charge. You can even have a younger person on the computer station but you are directing them and making the design decisions. As long as you can remain competent enough to use a computer on a basic level, you should be fine. This means you don't really have to worry so much if you made enough money to retire. You may still want to have enough from social security to live and pay the bills but work even part-time.
In this field, part-timing is usually for youngin's (late-teens, early 20s... working while also attending college) and old farts that needs time for their senior naps and appointments and such and still contribute with their wealth of experience and knowledge. Build up a team that are competent that can do their job without you hand holding them through everything. Get your degree and you should be able to pay that off before you kick the bucket. Sticking around in the profession an extra 20 years or so past retirement means you are making money and still producing. I.M. Pei's last building he designed, he was in his 90s. You'll be fine. Making a big retirement nest egg is if you plan to quit the profession when you're 65 to 70 years old and therefore have no other income from working. If you work, the nest egg doesn't need to be as big. Depending on the state you get initial licensure in (not necessarily the state you live in), you can get licensed with a BA/BS degree. If you want to complete an NAAB accredited degree, you can pursue a M.Arch that's 2 year curriculum (at around 15 credits a term or semester). You can even do it online... even part-time pace.
More important isn't you got an M.Arch or not. You got professional experience. Just take the time to work on the M.Arch as you can even part-time. If it is online, you might have potential flexibility on time of day so you can also be working in the profession. I believe some architecture schools understand and recognize the need of those that also are working in the profession and would be willing to accommodate or have already measures for accommodating by flexible class schedule that allow you to work on assignments around your schedule with certain due dates to submit. There is means to doing so and there is nothing wrong with it.
You don't need a Master's to practice architecture, and that's that. I have a master's but most of my peers do not have one, and some are in more senior positions than me.
Well, that's true to a point. If you need a license, you need to meet the licensing law requirements where you intend to practice. There may be several ways to get around the need for a M.Arch. Not all states allows "initial licensure" (in-state license vs reciprocity) with a pre-professional non-NAAB accredited degree. You may need to get licensed in another state and then get reciprocity. In few cases, they won't even allow anyone who doesn't have an NAAB accredited degree, completed AXP, and passed the ARE to be licensed at all by any means.
In which case, pursuing an M.Arch may be the only viable path with only a BA/BS (non-NAAB accredited bachelor degree) in Architecture because they can't get student loans for a SECOND bachelors from those Stafford loans. You may only be able to complete your first bachelor's degree with it. Second bachelors degree completed afterwards would require students to seek student loans from banks and the likes or pay out of pocket. At that point, you need to move on and get a masters (graduate degree). Depends on how these be enforced.
I know damn well, with Trump going into office, this is likely to be getting so much harder and less money available and he'll be making it harder for people to get them at all because he wants to totally f--- over Americans because this is revenge against Americans for not voting for him in 2020. He's evil and bad and will do evil and bad things just to fuck over Americans because he's pissed at us for not voting for him in 2020 and the indignity (butt ache) over him having to go to these court cases being sued and tried and criminal convictions. He's a villain. There will be that factor to consider for awhile.
At 25, your life is far from over. A masters degree is achievable, and if I recall, it's only 1.5 to 2 years max. I'd get that if I were in your position, after that the options are wide open. I finished my BArch at 34. Licensed before I turned 40. Now I'm licensed in six states. Having a great time too.
Two birds with one stone: disconnect your worth from your education.
It seems like you are stressed trying to choose between two ideas: either you are worthy and MArch's are worthless, or you are worthless and MArch's are worthy. You can probably sense that this is a false choice because it's impossible to decide on which is true. That's because neither are!
Education is really fun, and if you want to get an MArch I'm sure you could get something out of it. But you're also already a capable, working architect that could do without. You have agency! Everything is ok!
I started my Master's at 25, been working for 5 years now, and hopefully licensed by the end of the year. Like others have said, focus more on what kind of work you want to do. Even if you get an MArch, that's the key question at the end of the day. We have long, varied careers.
If you are on track to get a license in your current situation and you like your job, don't change anything.
Make the abroad thing a post-licensure goal. I think there's probably a route there where a license will override the need for a masters.
A firm where the pecking order is based on who has a masters or not is absolutely not a place you or anyone else should work anyway. There's no correlation between degree level and actual job skills in US offices.
Feeling Guilty Over Not Having a Master's
Hello all,
This is my first post here. I felt compelled to post here because I just can't take it anymore. I need some kind of answers or advice because I surely couldn't ask my co-workers. To start, I am an aspiring architect in the US. I currently hold an Associate's of Applied Science and a Bachelor's of Science in Architecture. I earned the former at a community college and I earned the latter at the state university I transferred to. While in school, I studied feverishly (not much different than anyone else I suppose) and earned academic honors each semester. I honestly felt great about myself. Now, it has been two years since I graduated and I do not feel compelled to return for my master's degree. I honestly feel like I have just started to live my life now that I'm out of school and I frankly do not want to go back. Moreover, I had gone to University during the Covid-19 pandemic, so it was a really isolating and dreary experience. I much prefer working and I have been employed at a firm that I really like for two years.
With that all said, I can't help but feel a sense of guilt that I only really have a Bachelor's of Science. Yes, I am applying for licensure in a state that permits an educational alternative, but I feel like I'm an underachiever or that I am inferior. But when I ask my co-workers who have their Master's about the program, they have told me that they felt they didn't learn anything and that it was more of the same from the undergraduate program. So these answers made returning to University even less compelling. Why would I complete a program that would cost so much money and take so much time to only learn not much of anything?
I had big dreams of studying abroad or better yet, working abroad, but honestly, I am not sure anymore. The problem just loops around, I do not have a Master's degree so I would not be taken seriously. On top of that, I'm old. I am 25 years old, that's the age most people graduate from a master's program. If I were to commit to a Master's degree, I would want to have a new experience. I do not want to retread old grounds or learn nothing (based on what my coworkers say)
Are there any other people who hold a Bachelor's and feel this way? I can't help but feel like people, especially those with higher education look down on me. At the end of the day, I just want to be a licensed architect, but I fear people may not see me as credible due to my limited credentials. What do you all think?
I remember the first day I arrived in a graduate program in Florence Italy. I called my (then) wife and she asked me what I thought. My answer was that the Gods don't reside in graduate school.
I think you need more design experience. Oh yea and confidence.
Good morning,
You earned a BA and a BS at an accredited institution of higher learning and you are working at an architectural firm. It is time to ditch the imposter syndrome. You are part of the architecture profession.
I earned a BS in economics, worked in business for a few years and then went to graduate school for a M.Arch. That was the path I chose to get to being an architect (license) to make up for lost time.
However, it seems like you are accruing experience and more important an income, at an architecture firm. You should be documenting hours and experiences and you can still apply through the AXP program credentials to get you to your architect's license.
The professional schools are there to get you into the profession. You have achieved that. You should be seeking the route to getting your architect's license.
Best of luck.
This is a profession that you don't become too physically crippled by old age to perform. Physically laborious jobs may have retirement at 65-70 and even then, most jobs sectors like contractors stop doing the heavy day to day labor of construction when they get into their 40s maybe 50s. Athletes retires from professional sports, often in their 30s/40s. Some, maybe into their 50s. By then, they just aren't physically able to be competitive. Contractors, it is usually move towards more managerial role than construction labor, this way, they don't die of a heart attack or something like that by the time they are 60 years old. Those jobs, a person has an expiration date. It is either so many years or by a certain age because even aging itself expires you from those types of jobs.
Our profession isn't very physically intensive. We are basically office workers for the most part aside from job site visits walking around the job site. This is a job we can do into our 90s. So if you are passionate about this profession, you don't retire from the profession. You are in it until you pass away or shortly before it when you are for medical reasons unable to and basically on the exit ticketing route into after life. Until then, as long as you are physically and mentally of capacity, you can work. Now, with computer tools, you can draw buildings even if your hands shakes. So you can do that and be in charge. You can even have a younger person on the computer station but you are directing them and making the design decisions. As long as you can remain competent enough to use a computer on a basic level, you should be fine. This means you don't really have to worry so much if you made enough money to retire. You may still want to have enough from social security to live and pay the bills but work even part-time.
In this field, part-timing is usually for youngin's (late-teens, early 20s... working while also attending college) and old farts that needs time for their senior naps and appointments and such and still contribute with their wealth of experience and knowledge. Build up a team that are competent that can do their job without you hand holding them through everything. Get your degree and you should be able to pay that off before you kick the bucket. Sticking around in the profession an extra 20 years or so past retirement means you are making money and still producing. I.M. Pei's last building he designed, he was in his 90s. You'll be fine. Making a big retirement nest egg is if you plan to quit the profession when you're 65 to 70 years old and therefore have no other income from working. If you work, the nest egg doesn't need to be as big. Depending on the state you get initial licensure in (not necessarily the state you live in), you can get licensed with a BA/BS degree. If you want to complete an NAAB accredited degree, you can pursue a M.Arch that's 2 year curriculum (at around 15 credits a term or semester). You can even do it online... even part-time pace.
More important isn't you got an M.Arch or not. You got professional experience. Just take the time to work on the M.Arch as you can even part-time. If it is online, you might have potential flexibility on time of day so you can also be working in the profession. I believe some architecture schools understand and recognize the need of those that also are working in the profession and would be willing to accommodate or have already measures for accommodating by flexible class schedule that allow you to work on assignments around your schedule with certain due dates to submit. There is means to doing so and there is nothing wrong with it.
You don't need a Master's to practice architecture, and that's that. I have a master's but most of my peers do not have one, and some are in more senior positions than me.
Well, that's true to a point. If you need a license, you need to meet the licensing law requirements where you intend to practice. There may be several ways to get around the need for a M.Arch. Not all states allows "initial licensure" (in-state license vs reciprocity) with a pre-professional non-NAAB accredited degree. You may need to get licensed in another state and then get reciprocity. In few cases, they won't even allow anyone who doesn't have an NAAB accredited degree, completed AXP, and passed the ARE to be licensed at all by any means.
In which case, pursuing an M.Arch may be the only viable path with only a BA/BS (non-NAAB accredited bachelor degree) in Architecture because they can't get student loans for a SECOND bachelors from those Stafford loans. You may only be able to complete your first bachelor's degree with it. Second bachelors degree completed afterwards would require students to seek student loans from banks and the likes or pay out of pocket. At that point, you need to move on and get a masters (graduate degree). Depends on how these be enforced.
I know damn well, with Trump going into office, this is likely to be getting so much harder and less money available and he'll be making it harder for people to get them at all because he wants to totally f--- over Americans because this is revenge against Americans for not voting for him in 2020. He's evil and bad and will do evil and bad things just to fuck over Americans because he's pissed at us for not voting for him in 2020 and the indignity (butt ache) over him having to go to these court cases being sued and tried and criminal convictions. He's a villain. There will be that factor to consider for awhile.
At 25, your life is far from over. A masters degree is achievable, and if I recall, it's only 1.5 to 2 years max. I'd get that if I were in your position, after that the options are wide open. I finished my BArch at 34. Licensed before I turned 40. Now I'm licensed in six states. Having a great time too.
Two birds with one stone: disconnect your worth from your education.
It seems like you are stressed trying to choose between two ideas: either you are worthy and MArch's are worthless, or you are worthless and MArch's are worthy. You can probably sense that this is a false choice because it's impossible to decide on which is true. That's because neither are!
Education is really fun, and if you want to get an MArch I'm sure you could get something out of it. But you're also already a capable, working architect that could do without. You have agency! Everything is ok!
I started my Master's at 25, been working for 5 years now, and hopefully licensed by the end of the year. Like others have said, focus more on what kind of work you want to do. Even if you get an MArch, that's the key question at the end of the day. We have long, varied careers.
If you are on track to get a license in your current situation and you like your job, don't change anything.
Make the abroad thing a post-licensure goal. I think there's probably a route there where a license will override the need for a masters.
A firm where the pecking order is based on who has a masters or not is absolutely not a place you or anyone else should work anyway. There's no correlation between degree level and actual job skills in US offices.
You are not old....geez. I am 49 and still working on my education.
Getting your masters will be a tiny blip of time in your existence. Just sounds like lame excuses 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.