Im currently a third year arch major at woodbruy university thinking about transferring to sciarc. I just emailed my professor a few minutes ago asking for a req letter and this was what he said about sciarc. Is this true?
"You must know something I don’t know about sci-arc. As far as I know they have been on a downward spiral for years and are losing enrollment, might lose their lease and need to move and on the verge of losing accreditation. This is all stuff I have heard through the grapevine so it could all be rumor. They also treat their adjunct faculty even worse than woodbury and nobody seems to stay there long. In fact, the good ones seem to end up at woodbury. There are also many architecture firms that have a “NO SCI-ARC” policy. This is a fact. Maybe that’s a reason they end up doing other things."
Considering this person said "might lose their lease and need to move", they absolutely don't know what their talking about. Escrow on the building closed last may, no lease, no moving. I wouldn't take anything they say seriously.
Either you're trying to start shit, or your professor is.
Also, you're talking about undergrad? Yes, sure, clearly a school on it's downward spiral and losing its accreditation ranked 6th this year on the Design Intelligence survey for B.Arch programs. Come on. Regardless of any issues with those surveys, it quickly shows any "NO SCI-ARC" policy is ridiculous, and an employer would be glad to have a talented employee from any school if they are able to work hard and produce as necessary.
Clearly an attempt to start shit from all fronts, and it undoubtedly will. I don't even know why I've fallen for the troll...
1. seems more like envy or something..like your professor doesn't want you to leave..but also doesn't really know what he/she is talking about.
2. it doesn't make much sense to post information from an email that was most likely intended as private on a public forum...this is a small profession seems like you could practice better discretion.
HA! I was trying to make sure I had no misspellings, but FAIL! It's a new trend that I just don't understand...to me loosing is so obviously wrong..but then I guess it's just like misspelling misspell?
from a woodbury grad: you must also know something else about sci-arc: their tuition is cheaper!! and once you enroll they don't raise your tuition, unlike woodbury. Are you in burbank or san diego?
The issue with the real estate situation is misinformed, and they were granted five or six years before their next visit by NAAB which does not indicate that their accreditation is in any danger. That said, the adjuncts are treated ungenerously, and the director's difficult personality has bred some ill will in the community and led to a lot of turnover amongst the faculty.
Some firms in Los Angeles are suspicious of Sciarc grads. For the firm I used to work at, it had nothing to do with the education and it certainly wasn't a policy, but after a series of poor personality fits, we got the sense that Sciarc was for some reason producing a higher than normal number of talented folks who were not meant to be working for other folks. It's an experimental school, and I expect the group that self-selects to go there is not the same folks that want to go to Yale or USC. This has some influence on employability once the voronoi tesselations are behind you and you have to work at a place where the emphasis is on making enough money to pay the bills and keeping clients happy.
Zzzz, Woodbury is at equivalent for quality of teaching and probably less expensive than Sciarc... Why go through the hassle of transferring?
My Mac has neither...and it doesn't have F1 either so that when i miss-hit ESC I don't get a half hour redirect to the Autocad help section on IE. I didn't know that F8=ortho either... suprisingly it has not had any impact whatsoever on my ability to produce architecture... or caused me to judge anyone solely based on their lack of knowledge of it...just saying. NOW..if they didn't know ctrl-Z then all bets are OFF!
I will argue that ANY employer that literally has a "No SCI-ARC" policy is subject to FEDERAL PROSECUTION for discrimination based on education.
I would think it will be important and clear that any employer that engages such practice shall cease and desist such practices or face spending jail time in Federal Prison.
Now, it doesn't matter if the school is Sci-Arc or any other school. A test of competence can still be done provided it is administered to ALL job applicants. Such as peppering them with some questions to ascertain his/her knowledge in architecture.
I don't know of any architecture firm let alone any employer willing to risk being thrown in jail and business licensed revoked for labeling and establishing a policy like "No Sci-Arc policy".
Sep 20, 11 5:40 pm ·
·
First off F8 is software dependent. It can change like the wind between versions.
Also, what if you use other CAD programs or BIM's that isn't an Autodesk product? It doesn't matter. I personally don't give a rip. The software varied over the years therefore... so what.
I will argue that ANY employer that literally has a "No SCI-ARC" policy is subject to FEDERAL PROSECUTION for discrimination based on education.
A test of competence can still be done provided it is administered to ALL job applicants.
oh come on. you're not getting prosecuted for not interviewing every possible qualified candidate. if you get 200+ resumes for a single job opening and you don't call the sci-arc people you're not going to jail and losing your business license.
Sep 20, 11 6:15 pm ·
·
If you have an official policy in writing then yes you will be A) sued and B) because you have an established unlawful discriminatory policy (based on education) and C) therefore by having such, you are therefore guilty. You will be fined and possibly you have jail time.
By having 200+ resumes and not selecting someone from sci-arc simply because that person doesn't qualify as well as another person is a different issue but to have a policy of anti- Sci-Arc is akin to not hiring someone because they went to a different school than you or is of another race or gender. It is EXPLICITLY in the law. If Sci-Arc is an NAAB accredited program then the person qualifies. If you got 1 resume and the person is from Sci-Arc, if you have an anti- sci-arc policy, you would not interview them because you completely overlook the person and waiting for another person perhaps without an NAAB accredited degree even though the job position states requires an NAAB accredited degree SO would that be unlawful discrimination... YES !
What if the person happens to know an attorney?
Having a formal policy like that is unlawful and even a policy of any kind or form including verbal IS evidence of a policy and may already be evidence against you.
Therefore, the point is to not have any policy of such nature. PERIOD.
RickB: selecting potential hires based on school attended is not a prohibited discriminatory act unless it has the effect of enabling discrimination by age, sex, et cetera. Sciarc's student demographics look identical to most other schools, except for an abnormally large hipster population. And hipsters do not appear to be a protected employment class.
Sep 20, 11 9:38 pm ·
·
Well, we have to remember both Federal and state laws and common law. They usually cover into the matter any unethical practices. Anyway, besides the point, such basis of employment tactics is surely dubious.
I'd like to a see a link to the statute that considers school attended to be a protected status.
I don't think I'd ever hire a UT grad due to the fact I don't like their football team. I can't imagine a jury that would disagree with that (unless their from Texas). (Also, disclaimer, I am not in a position to hire people).
Very funny, curtkram. This is rather fun. I feel like I'd hire a Cranbrook or Arizona grad based on being an alum of those schools, is is that reverse discriminatory? Is that preferential? Will I be sued if I ever hire/don't hire anyone ever no matter what my reasons?!
Sep 21, 11 2:03 pm ·
·
If you base the decision on the school vs. compatibility of working with the person. So what is the interview process for. It isn't meant to be the first person you interview is selected unless he/she was a complete ass at the interview.
Proper hiring practices would to pick the top 10 based on skills & knowledge basis (NOT the educational institution but the education of having an NAAB accredited degree if required for the position. Then interview have a top 10. Interview them. Especially for an intern position. Then rank the top 3 and then select unless somewhere in the process you decide that the top 10 is unacceptable so select the next 10 or whatever you have. So it is a ranking system.
The interview is about personality fit not qualification for the position.
Basing on the school maybe an issue but choosing a person with good personality fit with qualification to meet the position.
Sep 21, 11 4:44 pm ·
·
I would argue that activities that are discriminatory in nature is dubious at best and illegal at worst. The point is being above such behavior.
Hiring someone that you and your team can interact and work together is one thing but just because they went to such and such school... that is unreasonable and not justifiable.
Is sci-arc loosing accredidation?
Im currently a third year arch major at woodbruy university thinking about transferring to sciarc. I just emailed my professor a few minutes ago asking for a req letter and this was what he said about sciarc. Is this true?
"You must know something I don’t know about sci-arc. As far as I know they have been on a downward spiral for years and are losing enrollment, might lose their lease and need to move and on the verge of losing accreditation. This is all stuff I have heard through the grapevine so it could all be rumor. They also treat their adjunct faculty even worse than woodbury and nobody seems to stay there long. In fact, the good ones seem to end up at woodbury. There are also many architecture firms that have a “NO SCI-ARC” policy. This is a fact. Maybe that’s a reason they end up doing other things."
Wow.
any info on that? or comments
No info from me, but just wait. By noon tomorrow there'll be plenty here to read.
Considering this person said "might lose their lease and need to move", they absolutely don't know what their talking about. Escrow on the building closed last may, no lease, no moving. I wouldn't take anything they say seriously.
Either you're trying to start shit, or your professor is.
Also, you're talking about undergrad? Yes, sure, clearly a school on it's downward spiral and losing its accreditation ranked 6th this year on the Design Intelligence survey for B.Arch programs. Come on. Regardless of any issues with those surveys, it quickly shows any "NO SCI-ARC" policy is ridiculous, and an employer would be glad to have a talented employee from any school if they are able to work hard and produce as necessary.
Clearly an attempt to start shit from all fronts, and it undoubtedly will. I don't even know why I've fallen for the troll...
1. seems more like envy or something..like your professor doesn't want you to leave..but also doesn't really know what he/she is talking about.
2. it doesn't make much sense to post information from an email that was most likely intended as private on a public forum...this is a small profession seems like you could practice better discretion.
is 'loosing' somehow related to adolf loos? is it the 'ham and cream' diet?
it's so weird... so many mispell losing... he even got it right in his post...but maybe he was just copy/pasting there.
OT: Lars, did you mean misspell? (I know, that one's a bitch.) And you're right about lose/loose.
HA! I was trying to make sure I had no misspellings, but FAIL! It's a new trend that I just don't understand...to me loosing is so obviously wrong..but then I guess it's just like misspelling misspell?
from a woodbury grad: you must also know something else about sci-arc: their tuition is cheaper!! and once you enroll they don't raise your tuition, unlike woodbury. Are you in burbank or san diego?
"might lose their lease" Sci-Arc finished paying for their building a couple months ago, no? They own the property. *hovers over troll alarm*
i won't kill myself defending sci-arc, but seriously, what the fuck is woodbury university?
The issue with the real estate situation is misinformed, and they were granted five or six years before their next visit by NAAB which does not indicate that their accreditation is in any danger. That said, the adjuncts are treated ungenerously, and the director's difficult personality has bred some ill will in the community and led to a lot of turnover amongst the faculty. Some firms in Los Angeles are suspicious of Sciarc grads. For the firm I used to work at, it had nothing to do with the education and it certainly wasn't a policy, but after a series of poor personality fits, we got the sense that Sciarc was for some reason producing a higher than normal number of talented folks who were not meant to be working for other folks. It's an experimental school, and I expect the group that self-selects to go there is not the same folks that want to go to Yale or USC. This has some influence on employability once the voronoi tesselations are behind you and you have to work at a place where the emphasis is on making enough money to pay the bills and keeping clients happy. Zzzz, Woodbury is at equivalent for quality of teaching and probably less expensive than Sciarc... Why go through the hassle of transferring?
One of our hires from Woodbury was a gentleman who did not know that F8=Ortho. Just sayin'
surprisingly few people know much about orthodontics.
Has a architecture program ever lost there accreditation???
ZZZ your professor is full of shit!!! Who is he/she? Call him out!!!!!
F8 is the truck that runs over you then you need an orthopedic surgeon, yes?
I had no idea F8 = Ortho. Strangely, perhaps, I'm proud of this.
i wish i didn't know about F8. and F3.
My Mac has neither...and it doesn't have F1 either so that when i miss-hit ESC I don't get a half hour redirect to the Autocad help section on IE. I didn't know that F8=ortho either... suprisingly it has not had any impact whatsoever on my ability to produce architecture... or caused me to judge anyone solely based on their lack of knowledge of it...just saying. NOW..if they didn't know ctrl-Z then all bets are OFF!
FU F1
I will argue that ANY employer that literally has a "No SCI-ARC" policy is subject to FEDERAL PROSECUTION for discrimination based on education.
I would think it will be important and clear that any employer that engages such practice shall cease and desist such practices or face spending jail time in Federal Prison.
Now, it doesn't matter if the school is Sci-Arc or any other school. A test of competence can still be done provided it is administered to ALL job applicants. Such as peppering them with some questions to ascertain his/her knowledge in architecture.
I don't know of any architecture firm let alone any employer willing to risk being thrown in jail and business licensed revoked for labeling and establishing a policy like "No Sci-Arc policy".
First off F8 is software dependent. It can change like the wind between versions.
Also, what if you use other CAD programs or BIM's that isn't an Autodesk product? It doesn't matter. I personally don't give a rip. The software varied over the years therefore... so what.
I will argue that ANY employer that literally has a "No SCI-ARC" policy is subject to FEDERAL PROSECUTION for discrimination based on education.
A test of competence can still be done provided it is administered to ALL job applicants.
oh come on. you're not getting prosecuted for not interviewing every possible qualified candidate. if you get 200+ resumes for a single job opening and you don't call the sci-arc people you're not going to jail and losing your business license.
If you have an official policy in writing then yes you will be A) sued and B) because you have an established unlawful discriminatory policy (based on education) and C) therefore by having such, you are therefore guilty. You will be fined and possibly you have jail time.
By having 200+ resumes and not selecting someone from sci-arc simply because that person doesn't qualify as well as another person is a different issue but to have a policy of anti- Sci-Arc is akin to not hiring someone because they went to a different school than you or is of another race or gender. It is EXPLICITLY in the law. If Sci-Arc is an NAAB accredited program then the person qualifies. If you got 1 resume and the person is from Sci-Arc, if you have an anti- sci-arc policy, you would not interview them because you completely overlook the person and waiting for another person perhaps without an NAAB accredited degree even though the job position states requires an NAAB accredited degree SO would that be unlawful discrimination... YES !
What if the person happens to know an attorney?
Having a formal policy like that is unlawful and even a policy of any kind or form including verbal IS evidence of a policy and may already be evidence against you.
Therefore, the point is to not have any policy of such nature. PERIOD.
i think we are forgetting the truly important thing here.
what's your take on this new fangled software dependent orthodontics?
are my teeth safe? someone should write the aia and stop it before it all gets out of hand?
"16. Please check all that apply:
'Rusty! specifications and rubber duck import-export' is an EEO employer."
It's all about the disclaimer at the end.
RickB: selecting potential hires based on school attended is not a prohibited discriminatory act unless it has the effect of enabling discrimination by age, sex, et cetera. Sciarc's student demographics look identical to most other schools, except for an abnormally large hipster population. And hipsters do not appear to be a protected employment class.
Well, we have to remember both Federal and state laws and common law. They usually cover into the matter any unethical practices. Anyway, besides the point, such basis of employment tactics is surely dubious.
I'd like to a see a link to the statute that considers school attended to be a protected status.
I don't think I'd ever hire a UT grad due to the fact I don't like their football team. I can't imagine a jury that would disagree with that (unless their from Texas). (Also, disclaimer, I am not in a position to hire people).
Very funny, curtkram. This is rather fun. I feel like I'd hire a Cranbrook or Arizona grad based on being an alum of those schools, is is that reverse discriminatory? Is that preferential? Will I be sued if I ever hire/don't hire anyone ever no matter what my reasons?!
If you base the decision on the school vs. compatibility of working with the person. So what is the interview process for. It isn't meant to be the first person you interview is selected unless he/she was a complete ass at the interview.
Proper hiring practices would to pick the top 10 based on skills & knowledge basis (NOT the educational institution but the education of having an NAAB accredited degree if required for the position. Then interview have a top 10. Interview them. Especially for an intern position. Then rank the top 3 and then select unless somewhere in the process you decide that the top 10 is unacceptable so select the next 10 or whatever you have. So it is a ranking system.
The interview is about personality fit not qualification for the position.
Basing on the school maybe an issue but choosing a person with good personality fit with qualification to meet the position.
I would argue that activities that are discriminatory in nature is dubious at best and illegal at worst. The point is being above such behavior.
Hiring someone that you and your team can interact and work together is one thing but just because they went to such and such school... that is unreasonable and not justifiable.
I heard Sci Arc is opening a study abroad branch in newly declared State of Palestine.
now that is radical
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.