this is for grad school by the way...

I think they're more interested in your money.

They especially like foreign students.

I wouldn't recommend the place.. maybe if it was free. How much a year is tuition? 25k? 25k x 3 years = $75k

That's CRAZY!

UIC is a better deal. At the end of the day it won't make a difference to an employer.

I am an alum, by the way.

im an undergrad, but they let pretty much anyone in undergrad, and allow the program to weed out the kids who dont belong... sad fact is that it seems a majority of universities just need money, especially private schools like IIT. i know they are not considered easy to get into, but not difficult either.

makearchitecture is right, they love international students, but in general, iit just loves grad students, they out number undergrads almost 2-1 i believe. but they do draw a lot of graduate architects, so they must be doing something right

i'm in the graduate school and find it a great place to study. Chicago's amazing and the campus is inspiring. Just like with any program, it is what you make of it.

The school itself has become more popular in recent years--I know that last year they had the most number of applicants that they've had in decades. This renewed interest I believe is in part to the new buildings on campus and the new faculty. With a good portfolio though you shouldn't have a problem....gpa is less important. The school itself gives many scholarships to talented incoming graduate students.

I also quite enjoy the dynamic (or maybe tension is a better term for it) that exists between faculty engaged in the old curriculum and those that are looking at it in a different way. I believe this keeps a healthy dialogue.

The college itself has always been international--this is also a plus in my opinion.

I don't believe you should shop for "deals" when applying to schools. I believe both UIC and IIT are good schools--but very different places.
Since you're close to chicago--you should visit both schools.

I would say that it's not that hard - I wrote a letter of recommendation for a student of mine (MArch I at the BAC) who was a good student and had potential but a weak portfolio. I don't know his scores and he was transferring, so...

On a side note, Donna Robertson, I would imagine, would be a good dean - she was mine at Tulane and brought in lots of good young profs (most of them female).

she is a good dean, i will vouch for that

If you apply around 10-12 ft-lbs to the front door it should open, depending on humidity.

"I also quite enjoy the dynamic (or maybe tension is a better term for it) that exists between faculty engaged in the old curriculum and those that are looking at it in a different way. I believe this keeps a healthy dialogue"

There isn't a dialogue. A dialogue is what Reyner Banham had with Archigram, Renzo Piano has with his team, or Rem Koolhaas has with those in and out of his office. What you have is a lot of people with not-very well formulated opinions and there's a big difference.

I hate to say this but almost everyone from my class either knew that IIT was a crock of shit while we were there or figured it out once they got into the job market and didn't have a clue. With a few exceptions. I don't think that there are very good design profs there either. Buyer's remorse amongst those that graduated in the mid-90s is very high. I haven't seen much that would change my mind about the school: it is a big waste of money. The hype machine has been cranked up but since none there realizes that there's fundamental problems with the way studios are conducted, it is the same old shit in new, more expensive packaging.


But one amusing thing of late was this about "Professor" Elnimeiri:

[img]http://www.makearchitecture.com/boa/dr_el.gif[img]

Chicago is a great place to study and that's why I would opt a much less expensive option

makeArchitecture,

It sounds like your experience in the mid 90's is different than my current experience. I also believe this is true of most schools--they change drastically in the course of a decade. I've been to two other schools of architecture and find the dialogue or tension refreshing (my experience is that the professors have no problem sharing there opinions on this with the students and faculty--maybe it was different 10 years ago--actually from what I'm told it was)

Having also practiced--I find your musing on Elnimeri unprofessional. Obviously you are bitter, maybe for good reason but you do come off as extremely biased. Your negative experience shouldn't stop you from expressing a critical point of view. Being critical and negative are very different things. Something that new graduate students at IIT are likely to learn because of the "dialogue" that exists.

Once again, UIC and IIT worth visiting and seeing for yourself.
Inquire on the scholarship opportunities. For me the cost was comparable to UIC do to scholarships I received. The school has resources.

good luck.

Make-Arch... that's freaking awesome.

IIT has always been about copying. Before they copied Mies, now they are copying projects out of magazines. There are exceptions but I don't think there is a dialogue because there is no awareness of what the fundamental problems/challenges of a creative architectural problem is. Elnimieri while I was there was helping students design the same building he copied from his peers at SOM in the early 1970s. Look at Foster's high-rise buildings or that Yale students who did some fun things with a tube within a tube system.

I don't think it's unprofessional to call someone on their BS--especially when people talk about it such glowing terms. It reminds me of the way our media coddles our President.

The biggest irony is that no one at IIT understands anything about Mies. They have anecdotes but no understanding or awareness of the cultural context he came from.

Or here's another example of probaby one of the greatest dialogues occurrign in architecture today or at any time in history-- Cecil Balmond's work with dozens of architects from Ito to Koolhaas. AMAZING!

Also, post-it, it is part of our duty as a licensed professioanl to protect the public. Students are very easily seduced and I am just pointing out that there's more to school than glossy brochures and copying projects out of design magazines.

makeArchitecture,

It seems that the IIT of 10 years ago produced bitter architects. really--your comments continue to be biased at the point of being belligerent. Why should your comments on this school dominate a discussion forum that is meant to be just that--a forum. A forum where hopefully a "dialogue" can take place with out the domination of one particular point of view. The idea is that this individual gets an opportunity to get a sence of this school from a wide range of individuals, hopefully to get a somewhat unbiased view point of the school.

Based on your comments, are they? You've focussed in on an individual prof. that one would only likely to be exposed to in the post-graduate program. From your thread, do you believe that someone applying to this program would understand that? You've also questioned this prof. from an ethical stand point based on the above letter. As a professional that has access to such information, you should know there is a myriad of reasons why someone would receive such a letter--some may be unethical, but often these letters are retracted...but once again, why post something like this with no details or explanation--left for pure implication? This is not professional or just purely "meant to protect the public", which by the way i believe the notion of protection which you are trying to make really relates to professional liability. The indemnity plans are set up this way and dues relate to the construction cost of built work. It is a bit stretched when discussing graduate schools for students.

IIT hasn't been discussed in the glowing terms that you suggest it has been. The dialogue that I point out can arguablly be perceived as negative. I choose to engage in it and learn from it. The notions about understanding mies and who in the school really does is open for discussion here and at the school--I enjoy and learn from it. It is contentious in a very similar way as the Dialogue that exists between Balmond and the architects that he works for or with....(the for or with is part of that dialogue) I don't know if you've read his book, but the dialogue he has with other architects for me, is very much about who did what and who diserves credit for what...who really understands this a certain form and is responsible for it....

My point--IIT is an intersting school worth looking at if you'd like to study architecture in chicago. There are some that will and should disagree, as with any school, but lets try and share all of our experiences so that we can have a true dialogue.

[b]"It seems that the IIT of 10 years ago produced bitter architects. really--your comments continue to be biased at the point of being belligerent."[b/]

I didn't see your post until now. I guess I no longer tolerate BS the way I had to at IIT. If it comes off as belligerent, it's about the program and not aimed toward you.

I don't think you understand what a dialogue is. There has to be a common text. In IIT's architecture program, this didn't exist. Instead you have the star system. Much of the talk about Chicago Architects in this discussion and elsewhere on this site is all about finding the new star who will save IIT and/or Chicago Architecture. Hard work, dispensing with myths and cliches and a lot of sharing/collaboration and imagination will raise the bar on Chicago Architecture.

IN my studio experience, you came in with the learning you had. The students who knew how to draw and/or design already were the ones who were held up as examples to the class as those who "got it." They became teh stars in the studio. Everyone else was left to muddle along. They were told to copy what the star did.

Maybe things have changed but I went down there with a friend who is professor from Penn and all the same people are still there. I remember once when I asked an instructor why we didn't read common texts, discuss them and lift all boats. That's how a dialogue works. He replied that he was a professional, not an academic. That's why Elnimieiri being stripped of this license is ironic. What are his qualifications to teach now? The same people are there and they, like you, never believed there was a problem with the ways things are done. So why would things down there be any different?

I have taught Architecture at a University and think that there are institutions where learning and education are taken far more seriously than at the program I graduated from. They understand that dialogue is rooted in high levels of competence and common study and NOT overly romanticized gestures about art or empty references to being a professional.

Caveat Emptor.

Hey does IIT still have its undergrad studio sequence set up by material, i.e.: "Brick" semester, "Concrete" semester, "Wood frame" semester, etc.?

as i mentioned above, i am a 5th year architecture student at IIT. and feel like some of the crits makearchitecture is making are valid. For instance, the idea that there is a lack of cohession among the elective studios is true. there is no real common framework within which the elective studios are taught. its a gamble with your first few choices untill you get to know the profs. there are a few who are doing interesting and original work which is not just straight copying, but they opperate almost completely outside the system. peter land being a prime example of this.
the program is very well organized for the first 3 years. the core years are taught with a common theme, and build up basic competence for all the students.
the argument about how the school seeks out the starts of a studio and allows everyone else to 'muddle along' is complete BS though.
i dont buy that for a second. true, there are more talented kids in every studio. some people achieve that through hard work, others are just more talented from the start. but no student in my experience has been "left to muddle along." any student who does this is doing it of thier own volition (sp?). the talented students in my studio are the ones most pationate, and the hardest workers. the less talented students work hard, but might not produce the same caliber work, but they are not left alone, or forgotten unless they make an effort to do so. architecture school, and school in general, is what you make of it.

so, i agree with the idea that the elective studios lack a common context, that is a valid point, and one i believe dean robertson is trying to address. tenure track profs really make that difficult as there are so many old school profs left taht cant be fired.
but the idea taht IIT runs on a star system is complete BS. if it was that way when you were a student, i am sorry, but it seems more likely that you are failing to take responsibility for your, or your friends being left behind.

makeArch

from your post(s), i am sure you did not enjoy your experience at iit. this was not only implicit, but explicit--i get it.

i don't think it's relevant to get into a semantic discussion about the notion of dialogue, i do understand what you mean as i'm sure you understand what i am getting at.

my intentions in posting, and i'll try to be as explicit at you, were to share my own current experiences. You doubt that things have changed based on your recent visit with your friend and experiencing the fact that all the same people are there. This is just not true. In the 12 courses that I have thus far taken, 10 of the 12 prof's were not there 10 years ago (actually a few of them were probably still in school). So once again your comment skews ones perception of the school. This is my point. Your posts continue to do this alluding to the fact that for you, this is very personal--10 years after the fact.

The school and many at the school are actively engaged and use common texts as you've called them. One particular course for the masters class focuses on this--emphazising a critical discourse regarding the modern and the contemporary. So once again, your experience of 10 years ago is not my current experience--this is simply my point.

Caveat lector

out of curiosity, what specifically ($ ?) are the scholarships offered at IIT for graduate students ?

I've heard people talk glowingly of scholarships at other private universities which have dollar amounts that knock tuition down from 'ludicrous price' to just 'insane price'.

Also, whoever it was above that said people shouldn't 'shop for deals' with grad schools has apparently never had to deal with real debt. It's real easy to argue that everyone should keep their academic choices 'real' whilst not having to deal with money.

yes. IIT is easy to get into, to answer the question.

In reading the posts above, I can't help wondering if many of us don't expect too much from our programs.

We study for 4-6 years, then go out into the world to learn and apply our learning. We may have access to a better lecture program or network at school A versus school B, but you can't look to your faculty to give you the tools to become an architect; hopefully, you'll find a mentor or like-minded contemporary to help you find the center in you.

When applying to grad school, I was accepted to what was (then) considered the best school in the world. After 1 month, I left to go to
a "lesser" school with the intent of studying with a man whose work I greatly admired. I saved a lot of money and spent it seeing the Pantheon, The Alhambra, and rock gardens in Kyoto. The professor
turned me on to artists, texts and other media that helped me discover what really interested me. To this day, he is my mentor and friend.

If IIT or any school introduces core coursework aimed at teaching us how buildings go together and the relationship of places to larger humanistic endeavors outside or architecture, I think they've at least done the minimum. I'm MORE leery of the school that wants to give me what it thinks to be pertinent rather than helping me discover my own face. IIT or UIC....I really doubt it matters. Maybe save some coin and go see the Pantheon.

$25K a year? geez, THAT's a bargain.

i learned more in three hours at the alhambra than in 500+ combined hours of crits, reviews, juries, and lectures

oh man, the alhambra..... mmmm.... not to mention actually seeing any of corbu's building in PERSON... (you'd never know how much color he uses from all those grainy 30s b&w photos!) (not to mention being able to sit in the lounge chairs at the villa savoye!)