march06 - YES... i got the links you sent me. they were both very helpful in different ways. oh my - do you learn the art of third person speaking at berkeley? i was unimpressed with the work, which raises another question in my mind.
my professor, who later became my boss received his m.arch from berkeley in '96. i've seen his graduate work, which very closely resembles the work that is taking shape at berkeley today, 10 YEARS LATER. Don't get me wrong - I have much respect and admiration for my boss, and have learned a lot from him over the past few years. In the past 10 years, technology has been rapidly evolving, which could completely change the practice- from design all the way through construction.
So then, why focus your attention to a curriculum that predominantly supports techniques generated years ago, before all of this emergent technology was available to us? My boss and I were browsing through some of the student work from Columbia, which led to a coversation about technology, specifically how we can begin to investigate new methods of design - including materiality, construction, sustainability with respect to new materials, etc. I didn't think he would be very impressed with the work (at Columbia) as we stand amidst the very proportion-driven, Corbusian museum board models in our office. To my surprise, he actually expressed envy in response to the fact that I am able to attend graduate school at a time when these rapidly progressing technologies can ultimately shape the practice of design.
I feel that we are presently involved in a very different environment from that which influenced berkeley as a whole, and I view this as a great opportunity that we should not neglect.
shay-
i think we all tend to "see" what we want. i think in a way my gut is telling me to go berkeley, so in a way im trying to discredit UCLA almost to make myself more comfortable with my decision. kind of perverted, but under the circumstances, pretty normal i think. you may be doing the same. as you know i've been at a very forward thinking place very recently and i can honestly say that the way berkeley uses technology is unlike any other school i've seen or been to, not saying the only one, but from my experience...
to use the cnc technology to actually fabricate and understand design and the constructability of things is amazing. i would say that most schools either use that equipment in a theoretical way or to build a sweet model. but what happens when you are practicing and the beautiful form that is in your head can't make its way onto a set of cd's because you have no idea in the world how it would be put together? i've spent a number of year framing houses and i learned a ton, but the one thing that has stuck with me over the years is that not enough architects know how to build. its invaluable to the profession if you ask me. so when berkeley uses the water-jet to explore the constructability of a crazy form i think that is fantastic...i'd much rather being doing that then milling a sweet final model for my review.
and as far as our 3rd person speaking friend, this person did study architecture in undergrad and was offered admission to option 3. that says more to me than the overall acceptance.
very true about seeing what we want to see - before berkeley's open house, i pretty much ruled it out all together, which wasn't a good thing when trying to formulate an unbiased opinion. come to think of it, i was much more impressed with university of michigan's program over berkeley's, both of which were programs i wasn't seriously considering at the time.
i'm glad you brought up the question of buildability... for some time now, i was reluctant to consider ucla as a serious choice due to its well-known reputation for creating blobs and other such unrealistic objects. there was really only one major component pulling me in that direction (drizzler - see above). after spending some time there during mid review and finals week, i was pleasantly surprised to discover that the students had to pay A LOT of attention to detail and buildability of each project. did you take some time to look at the first year's projects in the gallery? they were required to pump out some seriously detailed section drawings to ensure that the thing could actually work in reality. i had the fortune of attending the actual reviews, and noticed that the professors were very concerned with connections, structural stability, feasibility. another concern that was pointed out was cost... a lot of the projects were most likely really expensive to build, still an issue with the profs.
i've worked in an office for two years, so i've seen what it takes to put a building together. i can't stand comparing ucb to ucla (because they were so different), but i was impressed with the level of detail and completedness at ucla. i did, however, see some (not many) details at ucb which weren't all that difficult to draw anyway.... typical column/beam connections, mostly solid wall hatch. i'm interested, not only in desiging a building, but designing the connections as well.
i have to admit, the design philosophy at ucb is much more comfortable to me, but i feel that school is the time to step out of your comfort zone. i have plenty of time after school to feel comfortable.
i've been working for 6 years and i learned more about building in one summer framing and my first year in an office than i ever did and ever will in school. i will also say that drawing or detailing certain connections is A LOT different than actually understanding that connection. sure i guess its nice to see that students concern themselves with structure and detailing, but that really tells me nothing but that. it doesn't tell me they actually understand what goes on the paper. they may be good at regurgitating things learned from structures or from a framing reference book.
but overall im less concerned with learning to draw certain connections and details than i am with actually building them. perhaps this is due in part to my knowledge already, but its also due in part to my belief that school is a time to experiment and learn from those experiments. trust me you'll spend enough time in your near professional future detailing drawings to death. again personal preferences here, but im more interested in taking that detail and fabricating it.
for instance in lisa's work, students obviously had to come up with framing plans and details for how those structures would be cut and fabricated...that's where i feel UCLA takes it to, berkeley went one step further, using the emerging cnc technologies to actually BUILD it. HUGE difference here, at least to me.
good point... i didn't see that very much at ucla, even at the practices we visited.
at this point, i'm going with my gut instinct as well... i was mainly uninspired at berkeley, yet there is something that both you and my friend really loved at berkeley. you'll probably see him there next year.
i'd hate to say it, i think something (subliminally) had to do with the cute girl who showed us around at berkeley. the huge asian/hispanic population at ucla was a contradiction to my friend's preconceived notion of the "smoking hot california babe". too bad.
he hasn't really decided yet, but i'm gathering from certain things he says that he's going to choose berkeley in the end. he's still considering umich and ucla (as a distant third).
funny thing happened to me on the plane on the way to LA. this drunk woman in her early thirties was sitting beside me and we got to talking. after listening to her life story three times in a row, we started talking about my impending decisions. basically she kept putting her hand on my chest (which was kind of strange), while saying "it's all about what's in here". after every decision she's made, she felt as though she knew it all along anyway. after a few beers, i started feeling it too ;)
oh... by the way, my friend has interests similar to yours, which makes sense. he's worked in construction before and is interested in the building of installations/full-scale modeling. umich is also has a focus on fabrication - some of the installations they had in the arch building were very impressive, more so than the ones i saw at berkeley. it's a shame the school's in the midwest.
it is a shame, i wanted to apply there. my bags said no. in the end i didn't mind because i didn't think UCLA and berkeley were all that different in terms of overall education. i have a lot of respect for that program and the people there though
I think UCLA could do a better job of marketing itself rather than parading around its big name professors at the open house. There actually have been design/build studios or seminars every quarter I've been there.
A couple examples...
Construction just started last week on DeCafe installing felt acoustic treatments, building new stairs, projector stands and a few other things. It's legitmate construction too.. not just some vacuum formed panels or something. They're working with steel, wood, concrete and using felt for the acoustic wall and ceiling treatment. This was a two part elective where in the winter quarter the students designed the project within a budget given by the school and researched the materials and manufacturers needed to make it work. The computer was used heavily in the process but there were also many large scale models and mock ups that were built and presented. I think you just missed it too, because I believe they started construction the day after open house.
Mark Mack is teaching a 3 quarter long design/build studio which was a competition sponsored by Red Bull for an outdoor space to hold concerts and events. The site was in Culver City I believe. The students designed it in the fall, then a winning design was chosen and I believe they are currently building it or will be building it shortly.
Also on a smaller scale, there are always a one or more tech seminars each year that involve building working prototypes. Typically wall systems or lamps.
This quarter Heather Roberge is teaching a studio devoted to facades. They are going to spend I think around 2 weeks in London and Basil visiting some well known offices there like Zaha's and Herzog and DeMeuron's. I don't believe they will be physically constructing full scale facades, but certainly it will be an exercise in details, material and affect.
I think there are programs out there that offer more physical construction if that's what you want, but the opportunity is here too. I think some of this confusion is because they don't show half the work that gets done here at open house. Also most of the construction opportunities come in your third year, and I think they spent more time talking about the core studios. I agree, I think you learn more in the work environment regarding construction, but I think it's important that you do more than draw and build models while in school.
how frustrating that you have to make a decision based on one day, that could be seriously altered by the day's itinerary, not to mention the selection of tour guides, faculty, student work, just to name a few.
a lot of the discussion at the UCLA open house was aimed at comparing UCLA to other schools, such as harvard, mit, columbia. prospective students didn't have many questions about the curriculum, or about the classes offerered for that matter. our tour guide at berkeley was particularly interested in design/build projects, which is probably the reason why we talked about it so much. who knows.
during each open house, each school emphasizes the best thing about their program. so even if eveything else is the same (including course offerings, quality of work/instruction), UCLA is going to brag about the names because it's an advantage they have over other programs.
comment about the berkeley open house... i made a complaint earlier about the shop being closed, which didn't bother me in itself... it just make me question the organization of school. funny how they couldn't find a single soul to open it up. the shop at my school now is closed at strange times as well, and i've run into situations where i need to quickly use some of the equipment, and can't get in. just frustrating when you're on a roll and the shop is closed.
i was talking to more berkeley grads, who verified that it's true - you really do have to motivate yourself to get what you want out of it. they loved the school, but admitted that the bay area lifestyle had a lot do to with it.
i also attended the open house last friday, and then went back monday unaccompanied, and had two vastly different experiences.
i had a favorable impression prior to the open house, and left raher underwhelmed. things were incredibly disorganized and the entire day seemed rather ad-hoc, and the work i saw didn't seem, as a whole, particularily impressive. likewise, several of the more prominent members of the faculty were absent (saitowitz, choksombatchai, solomon, hood, etc). the students i did meet all seemed genuinely nice.
however, on monday, i did meet with a couple of faculty members, toured the studios on my own, and took in the new maybeck fellows exhibit that was being installed on monday afternoon (which at first glance seemed quite visually interesting -- much more ucla/columbia than cal -- and would've given me a dramatically different first impression). wholly, monday left me with the sense that what was presented on friday didn't accurately reflect the school at all.
i definitely have the sense now that the school has strong intellectual and practical resources, but that perhaps more than most other well known programs, the onus is on the student to marshall them for their own benefit.
good post, but you didn't help! ;p i am so undecided.
i just wish i could go back and see for myself. the open house was pretty disappointing in my opinion... not really organized, not too exciting. i visited the school once before and absolutely loved it, but didn't feel it at all the second time i went. maybe it had to so something with the fact that i was sick during open house... didn't really feel like asking many questions, didn't really want to be there at all actually.
right now, i'm trying to do more research on the place... trying to find out where cal alumni wind up after school. maybe that will help, or maybe i'm trying too hard.
you are trying too hard. if you're good you're good, cal alumni are really no different than UCLA almuni. if you're good and got your degree from a top school, which all of these schools are its really up to you where you end up.
very true... my undergrad school is a great example of that. when you're good, you're good. when you're bad, you're just plain awful. the latter happens more often.
that's so true. the more i talk to people the more names and places don't interest me. i have a friend at yale who is about to graduate in may and she would take the non-name over the starchitect any day of the week, the more i think about it, the more i think she's right on. so i figure im going to ignore big names and cool firms and go to a school that fits ME best, a school that allows me to do what i want, when i want and how i want...in that setting one can really exhibit your true potential and at that point if i want a job with thom mayne then i'll go get one, knowing that my work is my best and its about me.
i also can't escape the absolute ringing endorsements i get from every student at berkeley i speak with, current and past.
connections are great, but they will only get you so far.
honestly, that's why i can't rule the place out - i keep hearing great things about it from alumni. i guess i came to this conclusion (for myself) at least... i believe that i'll have the most fun at berkeley, i'll get to meet more interesting people who have similar interests, and probably get the most chances to get my feet wet with other things i've always been interested in. on the other hand, i feel that i (personally) would be much more challenged more at ucla... also pretty important to me. so if it's between the two schools, it feels like i'm choosing between lifestyles, not necessarily programs.
i sort of see where you're coming from. more challenged by UCLA because its more structured, but are you being 'challenged' by things/people that you are interested in? i had the same debate, i felt i would sort of flounder in a wide open program and then i had an epiphany.
who better a person to challenge me, than me? i understand the set-up at UCB is daunting at first, it certainly was to me. but when push comes to shove a wide open program is the MOST challenging of all. sure if you're not into it, you could conceivably coast through.
but if you're serious about getting everything out of these 2-3 yrs its really a great opportunity for me to REALLY challenge myself in ways i never thought possible. i don't know, to me there is something really gratifying about that, more so than being a starchitects research monkey for a yr.
j- i'll say this and i gotta go cause i have to get to class.
a friend of mine would tell you that you don't need to go to school because you already have your PhD (your player hatin' degree) - and i mean that in the most lighthearted way.
i must admit, it disappointed me when i realized that i would get to choose my own thesis, but i'd probably end up directing my projects toward things i find interesting anyway. i found the research studio topics to be pretty interesting, otherwise, i wouldn't consider going there. if i honestly felt that i would end up being a "starchitects research monkey for a yr.", than you bet i wouldn't be signing up.
if you speak french when i say 'you' i mean vous, not tu. collective you. i don't know you from a hole in the wall really. im not questioning your motives or desires. im just thinking aloud.
and while the research studios may be interesting, i won't dispute that, they're still someone else's agenda.
ooh. i didn't think you were personally talking about me at all, nor am i offended. if there's anything i've learned in life it's that we all have our own motives. kind of funny that happened... it's actually how i got into a fight with some girl on here. she thought i was talking to her (personally), things got out of hand and, well, it turned into somewhat of a cat fight. somewhat entertaining i must admit.
by the way, none of what i have said was meant to verbally attack anyone's choices regarding anything. i actually kind of like this volleying-of-comments going in this thread - makes me realize what i'm passionate about.
i'm leaning heavily towards yes to UCLA, but i was looking at the figures last night, thinking about loans, living expenses. so tonight, UMich is starting to look good for the full ride... not looking good weather-wise. don't know yet... ask me in two days;)
did you hear anything about advanced placement? what about you, yes/no?
i hate my brain. my heart/gut says berkeley, my rational brain says UCLA. and then i get mad at myself for being so rational. picking a grad school because i love my apartment and im too lazy to move seems like a terrible idea. i may end up doing something terrible and say yes to both. i really don't know.
as far as AP goes, mark lee told me by the end of the week...guess he really meant END of the week. we'll see. although the more i think about it the more i think i wouldn't want AP, i think its tough to come into another class and pick things right up and 'fit' in...i wonder if its worth it? but then finances start to become an issue for me, 3 yrs vs. 2 yrs. and at berkeley i'll have the opportunity to teach and if i wanted they could end up paying me to go to school there.
i need a valium.
yeah, i agree... how much could you love that apartment? is it that much better than living in the bay area? another thing to consider is your connections... do you have enough connections in LA to make it worth staying in the area?
honestly, i never heard anything about AP, meaning it's highly unlikely for me. as far as fitting in with the current first years, well, knowing quite a few of them.. listening to them..makes me think it wouldn't be an issue.
the teaching is another thing... umich has the same GSI tuition deals/stipend, and i'm already guaranteed a position working with a professor in the fall semester.
well i haven't 'heard' anything either...i just hounded mark enough for him to tell me that they were letting people know by the end of the week. we'll see about that.
and its not so much me that needs convincing, its my 'roommate' its hard on her and i feel terrible for asking. got to get over that though...
there are plenty good apartments in the world....but for grad school, do what your heart tells you to do! and yes, about the 'research studio' its total nonsense, if you ask me.
The research at ucla is all about a paranoid-critical method of inventing a logic, then trying to prove it. Not to take names, but Bob Somol actually mentioned 'inventing research'. Sounds pretty cool in school, but take it outside and it holds no water. I think architectural research, at least should be firmly grounded in reality and practise and not some stupid sarcastic outlook on strange issues.
oh fuck. just got this from jim kies...just when i thought my mind was made up.
I am emailing to inform you that the M.Arch I review committee has
decided to grant you advanced standing. This means that you will start
out in the 2nd year studio in the M.Arch I program and will complete
your degree in 2 years instead of the usual 3 years. It also means that
your unit requirement will be reduced from 126 units to 84 units.
not bitching about the offer, very greatful...although i did work my ass off to be considered, bitching that i thought i finally came to peace about my decision. also bitching that they don't give you much time to think about it...have to tell them by tomorrow!!
honestly, it doesn't make it any easier although it probably should. i wish it did. now there's the question of fitting in, being behind, etc. i didn't even really consider the possibility because i thought it was a lost cause for me. this also means that i'm placed in the same year as my 'bags'. don't know if this is a good thing?
funny - i wonder how many people were granted advanced standing for the incoming yr... i know there was only 1 person last yr.
oooh, the 'bags' i feel ya.
i actually wondered the same thing, they talk about it like its near impossible to get and then we both did, interesting. not to say we both don't deserve it. ;)
do you plan on telling them either way by tomorrow?
hehe. i just realized something. if we say 'yes' to UCLA, it's not like we screw someone out of being accepted from the waitlist because we're just adding onto the incoming second year. i don't believe that they put people on an 'adnvanced standing' waitlist. right now, i'm leaning towards UCLA, and i'll let them know by tonight.
was anyone at the Berkeley open house on friday?
female.
fellow with the hat, overtired of sci-arch?
no...overtired because i got up at 3:30am to drive up from LA ;)
outch...
what option?
im option 2
great discourse everyone...thanks for your comments and insights!
this was a nice conversation.
march06 - YES... i got the links you sent me. they were both very helpful in different ways. oh my - do you learn the art of third person speaking at berkeley? i was unimpressed with the work, which raises another question in my mind.
my professor, who later became my boss received his m.arch from berkeley in '96. i've seen his graduate work, which very closely resembles the work that is taking shape at berkeley today, 10 YEARS LATER. Don't get me wrong - I have much respect and admiration for my boss, and have learned a lot from him over the past few years. In the past 10 years, technology has been rapidly evolving, which could completely change the practice- from design all the way through construction.
So then, why focus your attention to a curriculum that predominantly supports techniques generated years ago, before all of this emergent technology was available to us? My boss and I were browsing through some of the student work from Columbia, which led to a coversation about technology, specifically how we can begin to investigate new methods of design - including materiality, construction, sustainability with respect to new materials, etc. I didn't think he would be very impressed with the work (at Columbia) as we stand amidst the very proportion-driven, Corbusian museum board models in our office. To my surprise, he actually expressed envy in response to the fact that I am able to attend graduate school at a time when these rapidly progressing technologies can ultimately shape the practice of design.
I feel that we are presently involved in a very different environment from that which influenced berkeley as a whole, and I view this as a great opportunity that we should not neglect.
MArch06 & Shaybug. You made me very curious. Can I have the link?
eion email me and perhaps i'll enlighten you.
shay-
i think we all tend to "see" what we want. i think in a way my gut is telling me to go berkeley, so in a way im trying to discredit UCLA almost to make myself more comfortable with my decision. kind of perverted, but under the circumstances, pretty normal i think. you may be doing the same. as you know i've been at a very forward thinking place very recently and i can honestly say that the way berkeley uses technology is unlike any other school i've seen or been to, not saying the only one, but from my experience...
to use the cnc technology to actually fabricate and understand design and the constructability of things is amazing. i would say that most schools either use that equipment in a theoretical way or to build a sweet model. but what happens when you are practicing and the beautiful form that is in your head can't make its way onto a set of cd's because you have no idea in the world how it would be put together? i've spent a number of year framing houses and i learned a ton, but the one thing that has stuck with me over the years is that not enough architects know how to build. its invaluable to the profession if you ask me. so when berkeley uses the water-jet to explore the constructability of a crazy form i think that is fantastic...i'd much rather being doing that then milling a sweet final model for my review.
and as far as our 3rd person speaking friend, this person did study architecture in undergrad and was offered admission to option 3. that says more to me than the overall acceptance.
very true about seeing what we want to see - before berkeley's open house, i pretty much ruled it out all together, which wasn't a good thing when trying to formulate an unbiased opinion. come to think of it, i was much more impressed with university of michigan's program over berkeley's, both of which were programs i wasn't seriously considering at the time.
i'm glad you brought up the question of buildability... for some time now, i was reluctant to consider ucla as a serious choice due to its well-known reputation for creating blobs and other such unrealistic objects. there was really only one major component pulling me in that direction (drizzler - see above). after spending some time there during mid review and finals week, i was pleasantly surprised to discover that the students had to pay A LOT of attention to detail and buildability of each project. did you take some time to look at the first year's projects in the gallery? they were required to pump out some seriously detailed section drawings to ensure that the thing could actually work in reality. i had the fortune of attending the actual reviews, and noticed that the professors were very concerned with connections, structural stability, feasibility. another concern that was pointed out was cost... a lot of the projects were most likely really expensive to build, still an issue with the profs.
i've worked in an office for two years, so i've seen what it takes to put a building together. i can't stand comparing ucb to ucla (because they were so different), but i was impressed with the level of detail and completedness at ucla. i did, however, see some (not many) details at ucb which weren't all that difficult to draw anyway.... typical column/beam connections, mostly solid wall hatch. i'm interested, not only in desiging a building, but designing the connections as well.
i have to admit, the design philosophy at ucb is much more comfortable to me, but i feel that school is the time to step out of your comfort zone. i have plenty of time after school to feel comfortable.
well here is my response...
i've been working for 6 years and i learned more about building in one summer framing and my first year in an office than i ever did and ever will in school. i will also say that drawing or detailing certain connections is A LOT different than actually understanding that connection. sure i guess its nice to see that students concern themselves with structure and detailing, but that really tells me nothing but that. it doesn't tell me they actually understand what goes on the paper. they may be good at regurgitating things learned from structures or from a framing reference book.
but overall im less concerned with learning to draw certain connections and details than i am with actually building them. perhaps this is due in part to my knowledge already, but its also due in part to my belief that school is a time to experiment and learn from those experiments. trust me you'll spend enough time in your near professional future detailing drawings to death. again personal preferences here, but im more interested in taking that detail and fabricating it.
for instance in lisa's work, students obviously had to come up with framing plans and details for how those structures would be cut and fabricated...that's where i feel UCLA takes it to, berkeley went one step further, using the emerging cnc technologies to actually BUILD it. HUGE difference here, at least to me.
good point... i didn't see that very much at ucla, even at the practices we visited.
at this point, i'm going with my gut instinct as well... i was mainly uninspired at berkeley, yet there is something that both you and my friend really loved at berkeley. you'll probably see him there next year.
i'd hate to say it, i think something (subliminally) had to do with the cute girl who showed us around at berkeley. the huge asian/hispanic population at ucla was a contradiction to my friend's preconceived notion of the "smoking hot california babe". too bad.
she was cute. ;)
not to name names, but your friend that accompanied you to the open house is going to accept?
im a firm believer in the 'gut'...as my mom always said, follow your heart, it never lies
he hasn't really decided yet, but i'm gathering from certain things he says that he's going to choose berkeley in the end. he's still considering umich and ucla (as a distant third).
funny thing happened to me on the plane on the way to LA. this drunk woman in her early thirties was sitting beside me and we got to talking. after listening to her life story three times in a row, we started talking about my impending decisions. basically she kept putting her hand on my chest (which was kind of strange), while saying "it's all about what's in here". after every decision she's made, she felt as though she knew it all along anyway. after a few beers, i started feeling it too ;)
that's funny. people on planes are so weird.
who knows what will happen, i do have baggage to deal with still, but i say that in the nicest way possible. ;)
oh, and i got a response from mark lee at UCLA, AP decisions by the end of the week.
oh... by the way, my friend has interests similar to yours, which makes sense. he's worked in construction before and is interested in the building of installations/full-scale modeling. umich is also has a focus on fabrication - some of the installations they had in the arch building were very impressive, more so than the ones i saw at berkeley. it's a shame the school's in the midwest.
it is a shame, i wanted to apply there. my bags said no. in the end i didn't mind because i didn't think UCLA and berkeley were all that different in terms of overall education. i have a lot of respect for that program and the people there though
I think UCLA could do a better job of marketing itself rather than parading around its big name professors at the open house. There actually have been design/build studios or seminars every quarter I've been there.
A couple examples...
Construction just started last week on DeCafe installing felt acoustic treatments, building new stairs, projector stands and a few other things. It's legitmate construction too.. not just some vacuum formed panels or something. They're working with steel, wood, concrete and using felt for the acoustic wall and ceiling treatment. This was a two part elective where in the winter quarter the students designed the project within a budget given by the school and researched the materials and manufacturers needed to make it work. The computer was used heavily in the process but there were also many large scale models and mock ups that were built and presented. I think you just missed it too, because I believe they started construction the day after open house.
Mark Mack is teaching a 3 quarter long design/build studio which was a competition sponsored by Red Bull for an outdoor space to hold concerts and events. The site was in Culver City I believe. The students designed it in the fall, then a winning design was chosen and I believe they are currently building it or will be building it shortly.
Also on a smaller scale, there are always a one or more tech seminars each year that involve building working prototypes. Typically wall systems or lamps.
This quarter Heather Roberge is teaching a studio devoted to facades. They are going to spend I think around 2 weeks in London and Basil visiting some well known offices there like Zaha's and Herzog and DeMeuron's. I don't believe they will be physically constructing full scale facades, but certainly it will be an exercise in details, material and affect.
I think there are programs out there that offer more physical construction if that's what you want, but the opportunity is here too. I think some of this confusion is because they don't show half the work that gets done here at open house. Also most of the construction opportunities come in your third year, and I think they spent more time talking about the core studios. I agree, I think you learn more in the work environment regarding construction, but I think it's important that you do more than draw and build models while in school.
how frustrating that you have to make a decision based on one day, that could be seriously altered by the day's itinerary, not to mention the selection of tour guides, faculty, student work, just to name a few.
a lot of the discussion at the UCLA open house was aimed at comparing UCLA to other schools, such as harvard, mit, columbia. prospective students didn't have many questions about the curriculum, or about the classes offerered for that matter. our tour guide at berkeley was particularly interested in design/build projects, which is probably the reason why we talked about it so much. who knows.
during each open house, each school emphasizes the best thing about their program. so even if eveything else is the same (including course offerings, quality of work/instruction), UCLA is going to brag about the names because it's an advantage they have over other programs.
comment about the berkeley open house... i made a complaint earlier about the shop being closed, which didn't bother me in itself... it just make me question the organization of school. funny how they couldn't find a single soul to open it up. the shop at my school now is closed at strange times as well, and i've run into situations where i need to quickly use some of the equipment, and can't get in. just frustrating when you're on a roll and the shop is closed.
i was talking to more berkeley grads, who verified that it's true - you really do have to motivate yourself to get what you want out of it. they loved the school, but admitted that the bay area lifestyle had a lot do to with it.
i also attended the open house last friday, and then went back monday unaccompanied, and had two vastly different experiences.
i had a favorable impression prior to the open house, and left raher underwhelmed. things were incredibly disorganized and the entire day seemed rather ad-hoc, and the work i saw didn't seem, as a whole, particularily impressive. likewise, several of the more prominent members of the faculty were absent (saitowitz, choksombatchai, solomon, hood, etc). the students i did meet all seemed genuinely nice.
however, on monday, i did meet with a couple of faculty members, toured the studios on my own, and took in the new maybeck fellows exhibit that was being installed on monday afternoon (which at first glance seemed quite visually interesting -- much more ucla/columbia than cal -- and would've given me a dramatically different first impression). wholly, monday left me with the sense that what was presented on friday didn't accurately reflect the school at all.
i definitely have the sense now that the school has strong intellectual and practical resources, but that perhaps more than most other well known programs, the onus is on the student to marshall them for their own benefit.
just like the real world i suppose...
great to hear baker, good post.
do you know where you are going? im 90% berkeley.
good post, but you didn't help! ;p i am so undecided.
i just wish i could go back and see for myself. the open house was pretty disappointing in my opinion... not really organized, not too exciting. i visited the school once before and absolutely loved it, but didn't feel it at all the second time i went. maybe it had to so something with the fact that i was sick during open house... didn't really feel like asking many questions, didn't really want to be there at all actually.
right now, i'm trying to do more research on the place... trying to find out where cal alumni wind up after school. maybe that will help, or maybe i'm trying too hard.
you are trying too hard. if you're good you're good, cal alumni are really no different than UCLA almuni. if you're good and got your degree from a top school, which all of these schools are its really up to you where you end up.
very true... my undergrad school is a great example of that. when you're good, you're good. when you're bad, you're just plain awful. the latter happens more often.
that's so true. the more i talk to people the more names and places don't interest me. i have a friend at yale who is about to graduate in may and she would take the non-name over the starchitect any day of the week, the more i think about it, the more i think she's right on. so i figure im going to ignore big names and cool firms and go to a school that fits ME best, a school that allows me to do what i want, when i want and how i want...in that setting one can really exhibit your true potential and at that point if i want a job with thom mayne then i'll go get one, knowing that my work is my best and its about me.
i also can't escape the absolute ringing endorsements i get from every student at berkeley i speak with, current and past.
connections are great, but they will only get you so far.
sounds like berkeley is the right place for you.
honestly, that's why i can't rule the place out - i keep hearing great things about it from alumni. i guess i came to this conclusion (for myself) at least... i believe that i'll have the most fun at berkeley, i'll get to meet more interesting people who have similar interests, and probably get the most chances to get my feet wet with other things i've always been interested in. on the other hand, i feel that i (personally) would be much more challenged more at ucla... also pretty important to me. so if it's between the two schools, it feels like i'm choosing between lifestyles, not necessarily programs.
i sort of see where you're coming from. more challenged by UCLA because its more structured, but are you being 'challenged' by things/people that you are interested in? i had the same debate, i felt i would sort of flounder in a wide open program and then i had an epiphany.
who better a person to challenge me, than me? i understand the set-up at UCB is daunting at first, it certainly was to me. but when push comes to shove a wide open program is the MOST challenging of all. sure if you're not into it, you could conceivably coast through.
but if you're serious about getting everything out of these 2-3 yrs its really a great opportunity for me to REALLY challenge myself in ways i never thought possible. i don't know, to me there is something really gratifying about that, more so than being a starchitects research monkey for a yr.
j- i'll say this and i gotta go cause i have to get to class.
a friend of mine would tell you that you don't need to go to school because you already have your PhD (your player hatin' degree) - and i mean that in the most lighthearted way.
i must admit, it disappointed me when i realized that i would get to choose my own thesis, but i'd probably end up directing my projects toward things i find interesting anyway. i found the research studio topics to be pretty interesting, otherwise, i wouldn't consider going there. if i honestly felt that i would end up being a "starchitects research monkey for a yr.", than you bet i wouldn't be signing up.
later...
if you speak french when i say 'you' i mean vous, not tu. collective you. i don't know you from a hole in the wall really. im not questioning your motives or desires. im just thinking aloud.
and while the research studios may be interesting, i won't dispute that, they're still someone else's agenda.
the 'research studio' is the biggest joke at ucla
expound please
ooh. i didn't think you were personally talking about me at all, nor am i offended. if there's anything i've learned in life it's that we all have our own motives. kind of funny that happened... it's actually how i got into a fight with some girl on here. she thought i was talking to her (personally), things got out of hand and, well, it turned into somewhat of a cat fight. somewhat entertaining i must admit.
by the way, none of what i have said was meant to verbally attack anyone's choices regarding anything. i actually kind of like this volleying-of-comments going in this thread - makes me realize what i'm passionate about.
i hear ya...to each his own. so did you get the UCLA email today...two days, what are you going to do?
i'm leaning heavily towards yes to UCLA, but i was looking at the figures last night, thinking about loans, living expenses. so tonight, UMich is starting to look good for the full ride... not looking good weather-wise. don't know yet... ask me in two days;)
did you hear anything about advanced placement? what about you, yes/no?
i hate my brain. my heart/gut says berkeley, my rational brain says UCLA. and then i get mad at myself for being so rational. picking a grad school because i love my apartment and im too lazy to move seems like a terrible idea. i may end up doing something terrible and say yes to both. i really don't know.
as far as AP goes, mark lee told me by the end of the week...guess he really meant END of the week. we'll see. although the more i think about it the more i think i wouldn't want AP, i think its tough to come into another class and pick things right up and 'fit' in...i wonder if its worth it? but then finances start to become an issue for me, 3 yrs vs. 2 yrs. and at berkeley i'll have the opportunity to teach and if i wanted they could end up paying me to go to school there.
i need a valium.
yeah, i agree... how much could you love that apartment? is it that much better than living in the bay area? another thing to consider is your connections... do you have enough connections in LA to make it worth staying in the area?
honestly, i never heard anything about AP, meaning it's highly unlikely for me. as far as fitting in with the current first years, well, knowing quite a few of them.. listening to them..makes me think it wouldn't be an issue.
the teaching is another thing... umich has the same GSI tuition deals/stipend, and i'm already guaranteed a position working with a professor in the fall semester.
uh, i feel myself slowly going insane.
well i haven't 'heard' anything either...i just hounded mark enough for him to tell me that they were letting people know by the end of the week. we'll see about that.
and its not so much me that needs convincing, its my 'roommate' its hard on her and i feel terrible for asking. got to get over that though...
still need a valium
there are plenty good apartments in the world....but for grad school, do what your heart tells you to do! and yes, about the 'research studio' its total nonsense, if you ask me.
The research at ucla is all about a paranoid-critical method of inventing a logic, then trying to prove it. Not to take names, but Bob Somol actually mentioned 'inventing research'. Sounds pretty cool in school, but take it outside and it holds no water. I think architectural research, at least should be firmly grounded in reality and practise and not some stupid sarcastic outlook on strange issues.
oh fuck. just got this from jim kies...just when i thought my mind was made up.
I am emailing to inform you that the M.Arch I review committee has
decided to grant you advanced standing. This means that you will start
out in the 2nd year studio in the M.Arch I program and will complete
your degree in 2 years instead of the usual 3 years. It also means that
your unit requirement will be reduced from 126 units to 84 units.
congratulations! that's sweet. sorry at the same time...makes the decision more difficult, but you shouldn't be bitching about it nonetheless ;P
not bitching about the offer, very greatful...although i did work my ass off to be considered, bitching that i thought i finally came to peace about my decision. also bitching that they don't give you much time to think about it...have to tell them by tomorrow!!
more senseless bitching...
fuck is right. i got advanced standing at UCLA as well. what's a sister to do? my head hurts.
oooh. congrats to you! does that not make your decision easier?
go bears!
honestly, it doesn't make it any easier although it probably should. i wish it did. now there's the question of fitting in, being behind, etc. i didn't even really consider the possibility because i thought it was a lost cause for me. this also means that i'm placed in the same year as my 'bags'. don't know if this is a good thing?
funny - i wonder how many people were granted advanced standing for the incoming yr... i know there was only 1 person last yr.
oooh, the 'bags' i feel ya.
i actually wondered the same thing, they talk about it like its near impossible to get and then we both did, interesting. not to say we both don't deserve it. ;)
do you plan on telling them either way by tomorrow?
hehe. i just realized something. if we say 'yes' to UCLA, it's not like we screw someone out of being accepted from the waitlist because we're just adding onto the incoming second year. i don't believe that they put people on an 'adnvanced standing' waitlist. right now, i'm leaning towards UCLA, and i'll let them know by tonight.
oooh. that's devious, but i like it. hmmm.
so MArch06, whats it gonna be???
fuck if i know. heart says UCB, brain says UCLA.
have i already asked your opinion of UCLA as a whole? if i have, forgive me, my head is not 'right'
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.