I'm a 28 yearold engineer (very close to get my P.E.) and with a masters degree. I've been working in the infrastructure field for the last few years and my experience with structural is basic and not extensive.
For three years I worked in an archi / design firm and currently work for a strictly infrastructure company in highway design. I am not satisfied at my current job, and I miss design. I know this will come with a salary cut and increased stress but I think I'll be one happy engineer/designer.
I miss design and I miss designing stuff. I miss thinking about the design problem and solving, understanding how the spaces engage the users and the users will engage in a space. I miss the details and the macro level aspects. I'm not oblivious to the licensing aspects or the vast knowledge required to become an architect. I've read close to 10/15 books on the matter of architectural design and am quiet familiar with the structural and housing codes in Canada and somewhat IRC/IBC.
Some of the books that I've read recently are:
* 101 things I learnt in architecture school
* Form, space and order
* Visual dictionary of architecture
* Poetry of spaces
* Sun, Wind, and Light
* Experiencing Architecture
* The Dynamics of Architectural form
* In praise of shadows.
I’ve read other books as well, and not that it really matters, I’m an AutoCAD Ninja and have good knowledge of STAAD and Revit.
I've also done some personal academic-type research on Architecture but never published the work. I did one study that looked at 10 books that show cased "modern homes" and about 100 plans from architizer and Archdaily. In that study I averaged room dimensions by type, and their locations to other rooms, outside/outside, as well as the area of glazing etc. Overall I had 150 or 200 plans that I looked at. I never finished the study as I got tired of scaling and printing stuff. However, I loved it. Another study I did was to sort out condo floor plan designs over the last 20 years or so, to show the difference between them and how things have changed. This was mostly done visually with no real output. I'm also interested in doing more studies especially stuff that involves propagation of light through spaces and passive/active heating and cooling through applied and non theoretical basis (for example, a mechanized window awnings that operate based on a calendar. So instead of having to design an overhang, a designer could install this equipment to regulate the sun input into a space. I'm sorry, I digress a lot.
Needless to say, I don’t want to get into academia or academic research. I want to design. I have designed houses and small buildings before to a success. None of my projects were big enough to require an engineer or architect. However, I'd like to move onto medium scale projects. For one, I'd love to get into multiple-dwelling residential building design (condos/apartments).
My career options are:
------------------------------
1. Move to a structural firm and practice there for 2 or 3 years and move into a one-man type operation doing medium to small scale projects. I know my limitations and anything that will exceed them, I'll ask another engineer/architect to take over/help. However, I love design, details, human interaction, spaces, forms, layers, etc.
2. My second option would be to do a masters in architecture. Since I work full time and I need the money, I will probably do it through the raic-syllabus (online 10 year program in Canada) or Academy of Art (online March program accredited by NCARB).
My Question:
------------------
I’m looking for genuine advice, what do you think I should do? Feel free to ask, request info, or bash me.
There seem to be a group of people who are in transition from one to the other (myself included - going from architecture into something more engineering-based). I think it speaks to a need for people who are proficient in both?
An MArch will be so much design that you will start to miss numbers again. I think it may depend on where you go for your degree, but architecture school is typically more 'design' oriented than anything. If you feel like this is a weak point in your education or experience, then going the architectural education route could be good for you.
If you are looking for how to design with actual engineering calculations (the bouncing of light through buildings, etc.), you won't get that in an MArch program. However, I think that's actually a benefit for someone in your position - designing for the sake of design (or, at best, with sketchy and ill-defined performance criteria) is an important educational process for anyone who wants to design professionally. Once you get into practice, you may have more opportunities for combining your design skills and engineering calculations - it will certainly inform your design.
If you're almost ready for your PE, go for that. Keep in mind that after you finish your MArch, you need to work for at least three years under a registered architect before you can get your architect's stamp (and take seven tests - if there are still seven tests by the time you finish).
Alternately, find an architect once you've finished your PE and partner with him/her, or at least hire him/her for some jobs. (It might not cost too much money right now!) The combination could be really good depending on the type of architecture/design you want to practice, and you could maybe technically work under your (licensed) partner after you finish your MArch so that you don't have to leave your own firm to do IDP.
You seem to be approaching the design problem from an engineering perspective. While your reading list is good, you haven't mentioned actually translating some of this experience into design. You have mentioned things like statistical analysis of room dimensions and creating design solutions to actual problems. This is not the way an architect is typically trained. (Think more 'art school' and less 'scientific study'.)
I'd also talk to some architects and maybe do a pre-architecture course of some kind before making the leap. I like the way you think (architecture needs more of it, IMO), but the system tends to weed out technically oriented people like you in the first semester or two because of the incredible difference between what is taught and what you expect to learn. I think architecture is the poorer for it, but it's the way it is.
You could go into a building-focused building science program, of which there are a few (RPI comes to mind, although it's not long distance). You wouldn't be doing a full MArch, but you could possibly take your engineering knowledge and apply it to buildings; while you wouldn't be strictly designing, you would be doing something closer to the kinds of things you describe.
Thanks for the input. Since in most places a PE/PENG stamp is equal to an arch stamp. taking the program education is solely for education purpose. All it is, I want to do studio classes, and perhaps firesafety. On the other hand, i feel that I can challenge a lot of the courses in the average program, environmental design, arch history ( i read a lot of it), structural classes, cad /design /graphics, etc
I wouldn't be surprised if you did well in these classes! However, in my experience they are mostly treated as an afterthought - an interruption between bouts of studio. I think it may depend on the program, but these types of classes are typically divorced from the work you do in studio. If you have the option, I would ask around at different programs about the integration of these classes into the studio curriculum (if that's what you really want - you may just want to go wholesale theoretical design).
As a cheaper alternative (or supplement), you could participate in design competitions to gain some design 'practice'. A lot of studio courses, to me, felt more like you were practicing to get good at 'design' than actually learning anything systematically. This process was facilitated by a skilled instructor, but it's not like a studio professor can teach you design in the way that a math professor can teach you calculus.
I was in a similar situation as you. I haven't made it as far along in the engineering track, but maybe I can help.
Get your PE first, architecture doesn't have the job security and pay that engineering does, so having something to fall back on is a good idea.
I don't know anything about online courses, but I am skeptical. You tend to learn a lot from classmates in studio. Being in studio with other students is like an incubator for your ideas, and you can get help if something goes wrong with your model the night before the review (not an uncommon occurrence). After you graduate, you then have a network of fellow architects willing to help you out if they can. I can see the online courses working out if you already have connections within the architecture community who are willing to help you get your career started though. You wouldn't be able to work full-time in a traditional M.Arch program, but unless you have a family to support or already have too much debt, it might be better for your architecture career.
If there are any universities with graduate programs near you, see if they offer summer pre-architecture programs. I did one before applying to graduate school with Columbia. The program I did offered a full-time studio in the days or a part-time studio in the evenings for those needing to work. It was basic visual design practice to get you thinking at an architectural scale.
Also, you don't need rush into designing buildings on your own if you don't have a lot of experience in other fields of visual design. I find that most non-architects aspiring to be architects try to design really bland or underdeveloped buildings. They have very basic ideas about how a building should look and don't understand everything that needs to be considered to have well-functioning spaces. A boring building isn't going to impress admissions boards or working architects much. It is usually best to cut your teeth doing sculpture, drawing, or other architecture-related visual design that allows for more freedom to develop your visual and spacial reasoning skills without getting bogged down with so many technical details.
I don't know how much this advice actually applies to you. Not much was mentioned about your past design experience, so I am assuming you don't have much experience. feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
How about the MSBT at MIT? It's much more self driven curriculum wise and plays to your strengths with the engineering.
I regret not getting my PE (still have a year or so before the EIT runs out), but definitely enjoyed the design school experience (I'm more site and civil than structural, now more landscape than building design).
I also second going in full depth in studio than remote (I worked half time thru school, you can always try going part-time depending on the school).
Forget it man! Don't get an M. Arch degree. It's worthless! Stick to Engineering. You'll make more money! Heck, you'll get more job opportunities than most architects! All you need to do is SURVIVE! Architects aren't surviving! We're suffering! It's the end of the world for us!
The best engineers are architects at heart, so a design background could be a good professional growth experience.
Also, third on the full-on studio experience. I knew a guy who got a remote BArch (I think) somewhere, but it took him a while and I don't know how his work really turned out. Granted, he was working in an architecture office during this time, so it's not like there was a total disconnect between working and learning.
What I didn't say in my thread was at the time I was about 6 months in to a 9 month trip traveling, volunteering, and studying throughout South America. So, I wasn't working and really trying to figure out my next move when I landed back in Australia (although, I'm originally from the US... ah, the story gets complicated).
I've landed back in Australia now... about a month ago... and I'm still not sure what's next. But having a few months to really think about it was good. I've also contacted architects I know or have worked with to get their opinion. I also found Lee Waldrep's book Becoming an Architect helpful as well as the AIA podcasts (must have listened to about 50 of them on overnight buses the length of South America). I would encourage you to check out these resources (especially working Architects).
Feb 19, 12 6:30 am ·
·
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.
I'm an engineer looking for advice on doing an M.Arch degree
Hello there,
I'm a 28 yearold engineer (very close to get my P.E.) and with a masters degree. I've been working in the infrastructure field for the last few years and my experience with structural is basic and not extensive.
For three years I worked in an archi / design firm and currently work for a strictly infrastructure company in highway design. I am not satisfied at my current job, and I miss design. I know this will come with a salary cut and increased stress but I think I'll be one happy engineer/designer.
I miss design and I miss designing stuff. I miss thinking about the design problem and solving, understanding how the spaces engage the users and the users will engage in a space. I miss the details and the macro level aspects. I'm not oblivious to the licensing aspects or the vast knowledge required to become an architect. I've read close to 10/15 books on the matter of architectural design and am quiet familiar with the structural and housing codes in Canada and somewhat IRC/IBC.
Some of the books that I've read recently are:
* 101 things I learnt in architecture school
* Form, space and order
* Visual dictionary of architecture
* Poetry of spaces
* Sun, Wind, and Light
* Experiencing Architecture
* The Dynamics of Architectural form
* In praise of shadows.
I’ve read other books as well, and not that it really matters, I’m an AutoCAD Ninja and have good knowledge of STAAD and Revit.
I've also done some personal academic-type research on Architecture but never published the work. I did one study that looked at 10 books that show cased "modern homes" and about 100 plans from architizer and Archdaily. In that study I averaged room dimensions by type, and their locations to other rooms, outside/outside, as well as the area of glazing etc. Overall I had 150 or 200 plans that I looked at. I never finished the study as I got tired of scaling and printing stuff. However, I loved it. Another study I did was to sort out condo floor plan designs over the last 20 years or so, to show the difference between them and how things have changed. This was mostly done visually with no real output. I'm also interested in doing more studies especially stuff that involves propagation of light through spaces and passive/active heating and cooling through applied and non theoretical basis (for example, a mechanized window awnings that operate based on a calendar. So instead of having to design an overhang, a designer could install this equipment to regulate the sun input into a space. I'm sorry, I digress a lot.
Needless to say, I don’t want to get into academia or academic research. I want to design. I have designed houses and small buildings before to a success. None of my projects were big enough to require an engineer or architect. However, I'd like to move onto medium scale projects. For one, I'd love to get into multiple-dwelling residential building design (condos/apartments).
My career options are:
------------------------------
1. Move to a structural firm and practice there for 2 or 3 years and move into a one-man type operation doing medium to small scale projects. I know my limitations and anything that will exceed them, I'll ask another engineer/architect to take over/help. However, I love design, details, human interaction, spaces, forms, layers, etc.
2. My second option would be to do a masters in architecture. Since I work full time and I need the money, I will probably do it through the raic-syllabus (online 10 year program in Canada) or Academy of Art (online March program accredited by NCARB).
My Question:
------------------
I’m looking for genuine advice, what do you think I should do? Feel free to ask, request info, or bash me.
There seem to be a group of people who are in transition from one to the other (myself included - going from architecture into something more engineering-based). I think it speaks to a need for people who are proficient in both?
An MArch will be so much design that you will start to miss numbers again. I think it may depend on where you go for your degree, but architecture school is typically more 'design' oriented than anything. If you feel like this is a weak point in your education or experience, then going the architectural education route could be good for you.
If you are looking for how to design with actual engineering calculations (the bouncing of light through buildings, etc.), you won't get that in an MArch program. However, I think that's actually a benefit for someone in your position - designing for the sake of design (or, at best, with sketchy and ill-defined performance criteria) is an important educational process for anyone who wants to design professionally. Once you get into practice, you may have more opportunities for combining your design skills and engineering calculations - it will certainly inform your design.
If you're almost ready for your PE, go for that. Keep in mind that after you finish your MArch, you need to work for at least three years under a registered architect before you can get your architect's stamp (and take seven tests - if there are still seven tests by the time you finish).
Alternately, find an architect once you've finished your PE and partner with him/her, or at least hire him/her for some jobs. (It might not cost too much money right now!) The combination could be really good depending on the type of architecture/design you want to practice, and you could maybe technically work under your (licensed) partner after you finish your MArch so that you don't have to leave your own firm to do IDP.
Also, reading between the lines a bit...
You seem to be approaching the design problem from an engineering perspective. While your reading list is good, you haven't mentioned actually translating some of this experience into design. You have mentioned things like statistical analysis of room dimensions and creating design solutions to actual problems. This is not the way an architect is typically trained. (Think more 'art school' and less 'scientific study'.)
I'd also talk to some architects and maybe do a pre-architecture course of some kind before making the leap. I like the way you think (architecture needs more of it, IMO), but the system tends to weed out technically oriented people like you in the first semester or two because of the incredible difference between what is taught and what you expect to learn. I think architecture is the poorer for it, but it's the way it is.
Third post (woot),
You could go into a building-focused building science program, of which there are a few (RPI comes to mind, although it's not long distance). You wouldn't be doing a full MArch, but you could possibly take your engineering knowledge and apply it to buildings; while you wouldn't be strictly designing, you would be doing something closer to the kinds of things you describe.
Thanks for the input. Since in most places a PE/PENG stamp is equal to an arch stamp. taking the program education is solely for education purpose. All it is, I want to do studio classes, and perhaps firesafety. On the other hand, i feel that I can challenge a lot of the courses in the average program, environmental design, arch history ( i read a lot of it), structural classes, cad /design /graphics, etc
I wouldn't be surprised if you did well in these classes! However, in my experience they are mostly treated as an afterthought - an interruption between bouts of studio. I think it may depend on the program, but these types of classes are typically divorced from the work you do in studio. If you have the option, I would ask around at different programs about the integration of these classes into the studio curriculum (if that's what you really want - you may just want to go wholesale theoretical design).
As a cheaper alternative (or supplement), you could participate in design competitions to gain some design 'practice'. A lot of studio courses, to me, felt more like you were practicing to get good at 'design' than actually learning anything systematically. This process was facilitated by a skilled instructor, but it's not like a studio professor can teach you design in the way that a math professor can teach you calculus.
I was in a similar situation as you. I haven't made it as far along in the engineering track, but maybe I can help.
Get your PE first, architecture doesn't have the job security and pay that engineering does, so having something to fall back on is a good idea.
I don't know anything about online courses, but I am skeptical. You tend to learn a lot from classmates in studio. Being in studio with other students is like an incubator for your ideas, and you can get help if something goes wrong with your model the night before the review (not an uncommon occurrence). After you graduate, you then have a network of fellow architects willing to help you out if they can. I can see the online courses working out if you already have connections within the architecture community who are willing to help you get your career started though. You wouldn't be able to work full-time in a traditional M.Arch program, but unless you have a family to support or already have too much debt, it might be better for your architecture career.
If there are any universities with graduate programs near you, see if they offer summer pre-architecture programs. I did one before applying to graduate school with Columbia. The program I did offered a full-time studio in the days or a part-time studio in the evenings for those needing to work. It was basic visual design practice to get you thinking at an architectural scale.
Also, you don't need rush into designing buildings on your own if you don't have a lot of experience in other fields of visual design. I find that most non-architects aspiring to be architects try to design really bland or underdeveloped buildings. They have very basic ideas about how a building should look and don't understand everything that needs to be considered to have well-functioning spaces. A boring building isn't going to impress admissions boards or working architects much. It is usually best to cut your teeth doing sculpture, drawing, or other architecture-related visual design that allows for more freedom to develop your visual and spacial reasoning skills without getting bogged down with so many technical details.
I don't know how much this advice actually applies to you. Not much was mentioned about your past design experience, so I am assuming you don't have much experience. feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
How about the MSBT at MIT? It's much more self driven curriculum wise and plays to your strengths with the engineering.
I regret not getting my PE (still have a year or so before the EIT runs out), but definitely enjoyed the design school experience (I'm more site and civil than structural, now more landscape than building design).
I also second going in full depth in studio than remote (I worked half time thru school, you can always try going part-time depending on the school).
Forget it man! Don't get an M. Arch degree. It's worthless! Stick to Engineering. You'll make more money! Heck, you'll get more job opportunities than most architects! All you need to do is SURVIVE! Architects aren't surviving! We're suffering! It's the end of the world for us!
The best engineers are architects at heart, so a design background could be a good professional growth experience.
Also, third on the full-on studio experience. I knew a guy who got a remote BArch (I think) somewhere, but it took him a while and I don't know how his work really turned out. Granted, he was working in an architecture office during this time, so it's not like there was a total disconnect between working and learning.
I posted a similar thread on this topic a while back (http://archinect.com/forum/thread/18403110/march-as-means-for-career-change-from-engineering-australia).
What I didn't say in my thread was at the time I was about 6 months in to a 9 month trip traveling, volunteering, and studying throughout South America. So, I wasn't working and really trying to figure out my next move when I landed back in Australia (although, I'm originally from the US... ah, the story gets complicated).
I've landed back in Australia now... about a month ago... and I'm still not sure what's next. But having a few months to really think about it was good. I've also contacted architects I know or have worked with to get their opinion. I also found Lee Waldrep's book Becoming an Architect helpful as well as the AIA podcasts (must have listened to about 50 of them on overnight buses the length of South America). I would encourage you to check out these resources (especially working Architects).
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.