iM IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS MYSELF, SO IM NOT SPEAKING OUT OF EXPERIENCE.

IT SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE ONE TOO MANY HOLES ON YOUR PACKAGE...
BUT GO AHEAD AND DO IT, WHATS THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN.

AFTER READING ABOUT THE ASSHOLE THAT MADE UP HALF OF HIS PORTFOLIO VIA PHOTOSHOPING A RESUME, AND GOT INTO YALE AND COLUMBIA, I THINK ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.

IF YOU THINK YOUR PORTFOLIO IS GOOD, DO IT.

Be sure to type your admissions essay in all caps to show them how serious you are.

why do people get so defensive about caps?
Im cadding away and dont feel like undoing caps to post, thats all...

yeah! right on +q, why bother taking the entire second to hit the caps lock button, unless you type with one finger on the shift, in that case, type away......

IS IT THAT OFFENSIVE?

'CAUSE IF IT IS ILL STOP RIGHT NOW

It just looks like you're yelling at us all the time.

it's not offensive enough that i'd comment on it, but since you asked...

i find it really aggressive and since most people can imagine a tone to text capitals generally indicate something like yelling. i don't like it when people yell at me.

on that note. who is this guy who photoshopped his resume? i'm curious now....

look for KAI the photoshop dude. I envy him and hate him at the same time. pulls the veil on he whole stupid system.
and sorry, I am a bit of a loud talker anyway... so it is not out of my character.

i've gone from hating kai to being inspired on how to scam the system.

i have to say though.... as much as i dont' believe that one should put infinite amount of time into a portfolio (don't work a lot, just smart), it's rather depressing that he lacks the passion or the drive to at least actually do half the work.

but.... in the end, going to those school's won't make him a great architect if it's not in him to do good work. watch him be marked for fraud.

Is what Kai did illegal, or just unethical?

I mean, we all fudge here and there but straight up make up stuff, and I dont mean the work, I mean that he says that it was an art piece displayed somewhere.

Most of the portfolio should be done when you sit down to do it anyway. A few drawings here and there, and you are done!

Presonally I have less respect for Yale and Columbia for accepting the fraud. It shows they are just following trends/pretty images. And in my mind it compromises the whole process.

i'm not exactly sure where legality plays into it all per se....

if he received any scholarships for his work then the original artist can sue him for unauthorized use of their work. but if yale finds out that his portfolio is false, their reputation will be underminded and to be honest... i don't know if they would publicize it.

i'm rather confused at this entire thing more so because it doesn't even sound like he put forth false quality work. he 'blurred some images' and called it performance art..... what the heck were the admissions people looking at? some blurry photos and they decided that he was creative? wow... i'm not applying to those schools at all now.

woah there, I'd like to make some clarifications, it appears some people are confused.

•I did NOT use anyone elses work, everything I put into my portfolio was entirely my own work, nothing was taken from anybody else, not even photos which were manipulated. Taking other peoples work would be wrong.

•I did NOT say that a piece of art was displayed in a specific gallery when it was not

•What I DID do was take photos and say they were stills from a movie or performance piece.

•I DID build a crappy little model, put it in a small corner of my basement, take a picture and say it was an installation piece (without specifying it was in my basement or mentioning the scale).

I basically made a portfolio that was graphically pleasing and had projects that appeared as if they were full of content, in fact they were not. If Admissions committees can't tell the difference then that is a fault in the system and I'm going to take advantage of it. I had other more important things to do than bust my ass on a portfolio that will be skimmed through and judged on graphic design.

We agree with you Kai, we envy you really.
Thanks for the clarifications though. You must be either lucky, or extremely talented.
You must admit, that what you did seems unethical. I personally could never do it, maybe I subscribe to the sado-masochist architecture school idea that unless you suffer you must have not learned anything.

what does learning have to do with education?

i'm sorry, it was my impression from the short paragraph that you wrote, and i accused you of things that you did not do. i have no idea what kind of talent you may possibly possess and really cannot comment on what the admissions committees saw in your work.

i have been convinced that i will not be applying to ivys or other 'big name schools'

In defense of Kai, he or she is entering Yale at 3.5 years which mean that an architecture background wasn't needed. The portfolio could either be art projects or architecture so it doesn't matter. It was all his or her work anyway.

To say that you won't apply to ivys or big names is a bit ridiculous. They are big names for a reason and overall very good schools to consider. If you have an architecture background then you won't be competing really with the art portfolios anyway. It really depends on the program. Yale makes everyone go 3.5 years regardless of background while most schools will have different MArch options.

first off, i don't believe that the type of art that was submitted was commented on. i personally believe that you are more likely to get into architecture by not providing architecture art pieces as well. i think it's shows that you haven't necessarily been molded or too influenced by anyone yet as no one is looking for someone who can copy really well. that is no offense to anyone who will be using architecture focused art, but just a theory i have.

besides, i wouldnt' be putting in any architecture focused drawings as i don't have a bit of architectural background to my name.

second, my choices in places to apply to have not been singularily influenced by a thread on archinect, as helpful as they can be sometimes. i don't know if i'm willing to pay the prices that these school's are requesting and while they may have been great school's at one time, they may not be what they used to be. i will not apply to a school just because of the name on my diploma. i will only apply to it if it fits my needs and wants.

Yale doesn't have a 3.5 year program at all. Yale has a 3-year M.Arch for people without professional degrees, a 2-year Post-Professional program for those with B.Archs, and in some recent years (but not other recent years) has admitted some strong candidates directly into the 2nd year of the 3-year M.Arch program if they have an undergrad architecture major. So, they really have pretty much the same M.Arch options that most schools have - with the exception that getting accepted as an advanced placement candidate is much rarer (usually depends on there being low enrollment in that year's 2nd-year class.)

Yeah, it is a three year program and not a 3.5 year program. I find it odd that students that have a five year degree in architecture are there for two years and not 1. Of course that is an extra year of tuition that Yale gets so it kind of makes sense. Personally, I wouldn't want to go and spend a year longer than everyone else to get the same accredited degree.


pinstripeprincess - I am curious as to which schools you apply to. I do agree that they must be schools that will be best suited for you whether they have a high status or not. In reality, if a school is good then it will have a name. The Ivies have a reputation for being the elite but there are lots of other good schools out there that have established a name for themselves in architecture. If a school has established a name, it is OK, just make sure that they aren't living off of that name and that the program you go through will be what you are looking for.

It would be stupid to downplay Ivy League schools to a status lower than they actually are-indeed they have earned their top rate status; however, the point was made in the post just above mine about other good schools that have made a great name for themselves but they're not Ivies. I am studying Architecture in Houston, well, not right now because I am evacuated at the moment, but I am headed back on Wednesday. A few of my fellow classmates have worked at big firms in Houston who have hired Ivy Grads. NOT ALL, but some, have had bad experiences because they are not very practical graduates:many commented that some couldn't put together a basic wall section or similar basic functions, and others have commented that they expect to be lead designers right when they get there. Once again, I am not saying this to infer that every Ivy grad is like this or every Ivy program is somehow unattached from reality, but am saying it to express that one can get an incredible Architecture education without going to an Ivy League school and in some cases, some Ivies may be teaching from a standpoint that is too theoretical and not practical enough, and quite honestly, most schools are talking about all the same stuff these day and have students reading the same material.
School rank is pretty relative considering how firms are surveyed and also which firms are survyed as well.
A great way to find out if a school fits you well is to go visit the first year studio and find out who is teaching it, and what is being taught. Try to find out where that teacher came from and possibly what their views are about first year studio.
Anyhow, for what its worth

I've heard of people having the same issue that came from Ivies as well. I'm also sure that it is a problem at other schools as well because some students pretend that they are gods gift to architecture and assume that they don't nee to know CAD or will be deisigners right away as noted above. I think these schools assume that if you can comprehend complex theory then you should be able to understand a wall detail, but that doesn't always happen.

I am at Rice for grad school and will try my best to understand all aspects of architecture, from theory to details. Each school is different and you just have to find what the best fit is.


mjh00c - are you at Rice or at U of H?

U of H

to be honest, i haven't looked at schools in detail quite yet because i'd like to put together a good portfolio so i don't have to apply again. i will be applying next year so i am doing a bit of research right now into what schools i feel will fit me best. research will be conducted through speaking to people who have had experience at the schools, if i can find them.

the somewhat silly thing about how i will pick schools (rather than simply depending on the 'reputation' of an ivy) is the city that it's located in. for example columbia in new york. i spent my undergrad in a small city at a good school but by the end of my 4th year i couldn't stand it anymore. and as much as people are progressive, i still have concerns about race since i'm technically a minority. [i'd prefer that this doesn't become a tangent of discussion as you can't counter my experiences of having obscenities yelled at me from cars and people threatening to beat up my friends on the street]

as i mentioned in another thread i'm looking for schools that are a little more theory design focused, has a decent sustainable branch of courses, and has churned out a few competition winners that i like the work of.

i'm not keen on going to ivy's either, as someone had mentioned earlier, because of the sense of entitlement that many students are likely to have. i've had enough of that in my previous educational institutions.

I think your rational for choosing a school makes perfect sense. I agree with you in regard to choosing a school based on what city it is in-that will dramatically influence the context of your study.