I've also looked at UTAustin. Is that good school?

where'd you hear washu's program is bad??? while it isn't ivy-league like yale or princeton, it is indeed a highly ranked and regarded program. that said, it (or even the others you mention) may not be the right fit for you. this is the thing to really focus on -- what do YOU want out of your architectural education and college experience.

University of Florida

You might get in with great marks, but I'd be surprised if there was a program that didn't require some kind of portfolio.

Notre Dame has a good 5 year BArch program, no portfolio required. But architecture studies don't really start until 2nd year. All freshman are in the First Year Studies program with few electives. 3rd year is in Rome and all students go.
The program has a NeoClassical flavor to it these days, but you'll get a stong background in Arch'l history.

http://www.nd.edu/~arch/

A friend of mine had a great time in the undergrad program at Princeton. It's not a 5-year professional degree, so that limits your options if you don't intend to pursue a Master's degree.

Columbia offers some classes to its undergrads, but technically it's a graduate school only.

From my understanding (and I could be wrong) many of the ivies are graduate-heavy and their undergrad programs aren't really geared toward an architecture degree. They offer classes but it may be a BA in Arch Studies or something similar. From your list - UVa has a great undergrad program (BSArch) as does WashU (BSArch)- and I think they are pretty similar.

Notre Dame is a Beaux Arts school, I believe, which personally turns me off, although I am sure you'll get a good background in history.

the UF School of Architecture does not require portfolio to begin the program. Students pin-up after 2 years for selective admission to the upper division design studios and support courses. The University has very difficult admissions requirements these days...I did well in high school and decent on the standardized tests, but someone with similar marks wouldn't be able to gain admittance into UF anymore...

that said, it's a great program that will prepare you for whatever future course you decide upon.

^read: my marks wouldn't get me in anymore...requirements are higher than they were 6-7 years ago...

i went to johns hopkins undergrad and had a great time. i graduated a year early and i'm about to go into umich's m.arch. 3G program this summer. the experience i had here, even though totally unrelated to architecture was insanely awesome. i'd take this path again a thousand times if it were possible.

maybe you should consider studying something completely unrelated to architecture but equally interesting. maybe something easy so you can have fun. everything i hear from architecture school graduate and undergrad relates to how little time the students have outside of the studio. enjoy life.
take it slow if you can.

USC has a very strong undergrad program that's getting better every day. I graduated a year ago, and am extremely jealous of some of the opportunities that are available to the students now that weren't there when I was. They do require a portfolio however, but don't want it to be architecture necessarily, but pretty much anything creative- drawing, painting, woodworking, photography. I'd really suggest that you take either a summer architecture program, or some summer art classes to help you out in the portfolio area, regardless of which programs you apply to.

oh, and they've got the same thing going on as UF with the increasing requirements. I came out of high school right at the 5% mark in my class, with a 1360 SAT, National Merit Commendation, etc. I probably wouldn't be able to get into USC now.

Is this the part where we pimp our undergrad degrees to the newbie?

U of Cincy doesn't require a portfolio but it's entry requirements are also much higher than they used to be. I think a 30 ACT is required, plus some other class ranking stuff. On the plus side, you'll automatically get a scholarship.

It's also great for the co-op experience.

Also it's ranked #1 undergrad by Design Intelligence.


ha ha, yes I said it.

KSU
...don't blow off the midwest

Definitely look at UC Berkeley, especially if you're not 100% sure you want to major in architecture. They have a great program (yes, I went there so of course I think it was great), but, if you really hate it, there are a million other equally great majors to choose from and you'll still end up with a really prestigious degree.
Plus, you can create your own degree and can take classes from any other college. I loved being surrounded by all these other great opportunities away from the CED (College of Environmental Design) to balance my studio time.

Cornell

Carnegie Mellon
RISD
SCI-ARC

urbanbunker is right about the ivies

Cornell
RISD
Cincy

Then..

Syracuse
USC
UIUC
Pratt

Wentworth in Boston has a system similar to Florida where there is no portfolio to begin, but a selective reapplication process after two years. it's a five year BArch degree and the program is in transition, but in my opinion getting very good. the faculty are excellent. SAT scores aren't incredibly high, but it's due in part to the fact that many more folks get in first year than will after second year. even so, I think SATs and high school GPA even are far less telling in arch than your portfolio when you develop one. good luck!

Hey parallel: Last time I checked, Cornell was an Ivy.

OSU.

No portfolio. Pin up after the first year. True entry into the program second year.

Cooper Union
Cornell
RISD

UC Berkeley is a 4yr program, so it's not BArch degree. you can get into berkeley as undecided and get into CED. If your interest goes beyond architecture/design (ie. engineering, philosophy, history, and like 50 other majors you can pursue at berkeley), then I think you'll enjoy your time at berkeley. this one guy asked me if he can do double major in arch and mcb cuz he wants a backup, it's certainly possible, but don't expect to sleep or have social life for a long time (I told him not to do it, and... why would you do that to yourself?????). But if you're so sure that architecture is the profession you want to pursue, then go to 5yr school and get BArch degree.

MIT has an undergrad right?

I would add Oregon to the list and University of Washington, as in the state, don't want to leave out the northwest!

and there is a UC uni, other than LA, that has a strong program, mid state, really well known for its agricultural programs as well.......anyone, anyone. San Luis something maybe? I know some folks that went there and they were good.

Oh and maybe Auburn?

OSU = Ohio State

That would be Cal Poly SLO. They're good, but very technical. I think they require calculus, and are heavier on the structural studies than most. A bit design-light.

I actually left Wentworth for UF. It was really bad when I was there and the requirements were basically anyone that applied got in. That was a long time ago, though.

I did submit a portfolio to UF, so maybe that made it easier to get in. I do remember reading about a guy who had a 1400+ and 3.9gpa and was declined.

I would guess a portfolio would help a lot. I put one together by taking summer classes, went to RISD for a summer arch program - just enough to put a diversity of stuff together.

I'd highly recommend doing something to elevate yourself above the norm, esp. considering grades are not that important in arch school (or not that important).

florida if you like to make models

virginia if you like to draw

michigan/ohio state for a broad education + good football. michigan would be better in this case.

UT-austin does not require a portfolio and it's really good, especially for undergraduate studies. you can pretty much whatever kind of college experience you want at UT, and the arch.school is very balanced. AND relatively cheap, if you're a TX resident.

if you're not from TX, though...don't bank on UT-austin...they reserve 80-90% of freshman places for TX residents. in an incoming class of 65 students that means 7 non-TX resident admissions.

however...if you aren't from TX, but are really set on UT...apply to UT, don't apply for the arch.school, and then transfer in sophomore year. the quota only in my year about 10-20 people just dropped out after the first SEMESTER and then maybe another 10 people after the first YEAR of architecture school. during that freshman year take all your non-arch. courses (or as many as you can). calculus (it is required at UT if you didn't AP it in HS), physics, that kind of stuff. will make your life a lot easier.

hook 'em horns.

i meant to say, "the quote only applies for freshman admissions"

i guess UT didn't teach me to type

lastly: don't mistake being a good artist for being a good architect. they certainly are not mutually exclusive, but you'll learn how to draw by hand well enough and the computer is the great equalizer in architectural visualization.

good luck.

washu has no portfolio requirement. and the entire school has lots of other great liberal arts programs, so if you change your mind about arch during freshman or sophomore year, you can still switch your major without any hassle or having to take extra courses. also, lots of school-wide courses are available to you in your first and second years. but you really don't have much time to devote to them if you're taking studios.

washu also used to have awesome furniture classes, but the prof who taught them is gone so i don't know what that's like anymore. the campus is beautiful at washu and the neighborhoods around campus are great and really accessible.

for a lot of these undergrad programs, you should check and see who the current visiting professors are. when i was at washu, juhani pallasmaa was a visiting professor and he was awesome. i guess i only realize now how cool it was to have him on reivews and teaching seminars.

Columbia!

alright, as a disclaimer, of course I go here for undergrad as we speak, so i have a definite bias towards the program here. buuuut -

looking back, i really don't think i personally could have had it any other way... i mean, of course it really depends on your personal preference... you don't get a BArch through columbia, only a BA in architecture - so if you're looking for immediate licensure, don't come to any of the ivies for undergrad (er, aside from cornell... you like gorges? :P)

what you DO get from a school like columbia, however, is a truly all-encompassing education which is absolutely necessary for an architect nowadays... architecture isn't just design and structure, it's history, philosophy, sociology, ecology, technology, psychology, urban studies...
Columbia's definitive factor which distinguishes it from the other ivies (and many other undergrad programs in the nation) is its core curriculum, aka "The Core" (*thunder strikes behind the neoclassical columbian libraries*). It's a 250 year-old tradition which i think PERFECTLY complements the education of an architect - i've already learned an insane amount of information which has totally helped me in arch theory and even studio courses to strengthen my design.... of course, you can take philosophy or art/music history courses at any college, but what's awesome about columbia is the fact that EVERY person on campus shares this deeper understanding of the world, and so there's a constant exchange of ideas and debate outside the classroom.

columbia is a lot more than learning from the past, however... the very fact that columbia is right in new york city really influences a lot about the school's cutting edge nature... i think this is really visible in the architecture of the campus itself. sure, it's all mostly neoclassical and whatnot, but then you have a building like lerner hall (tschumi, the previous dean of our arch grad school) which equally defines the campus. in the same way, even though our core curriculum is heavily rooted in the classics, i always feel as if columbia is great in terms of providing us with a cutting-edge education which is extremely up-to-date with the world today.
even though the arch strength of columbia is FOR SURE in the grad school, i think us undergrad folk benefit from that tons... a lot of what happens in the grad school trickles down to us via the professors and TAs (who go to the grad school). and hell, i've definitely gone to an avery party and used their facilities... hehe...

wow OK, talk about academic masturbation there. sorry about that, hope i didn't come off as too much of a prick. i just really like my school, and no one repped columbia undergrad yet :P

a couple of warnings though - although i personally think it's worth it, having to do the Core along with the architecture program is really fucking hardcore. it's essentially double-majoring, which kind of sucks sometimes, since you're never giving 100% to your studios... and social life? sleep? hygiene? hah! (although this is pretty universal in all architecture students i suppose...)
also, columbia is just kind of... well, it's pretty intense. you're not in the middle of nowhere, and increasingly you're stuck with a population of overachievers who are REALLY good at what they do... this is great sometimes, since you meet some fantastically intelligent people... but sometimes not so great when you start to work with them. the admission rate is something like 9% now, and honestly this really fosters a really really crazy (good and bad) population...

ok, and the note of columbia being crazy, i end. :P

holy shit that was long... sorry again :P

that was a great ad for columbia. wish i could have afforded it.

see, the problem is, architects are generalists. we have to know a little about a lot. but you'll find that, when you get into architecture school, that it is very easy to get sucked into only thinking about design studio to the extreme detriment of all your other courses (architectural and non-architectural).

so you end up with a lot of architects whose knowledge of almost anything other than current architectural design smacks of abject ignorance dressed up as dilettantism. it's cafeteria intellectualism, where the only side dishes that get consumed are the ones that complement the main dish.

check out this forum. many architects can expound upon the wonders of milan kundera novels, obscure electronic music, jacques derrida, and donald judd installations. but not many could summarize the plot of "bleak house" or distinguish between baroque and romantic classical music or talk about the philosophy of aristotle and how it informed medieval catholicism or analyze a painting by caravaggio.

because, frankly, none of their design profs knew about this stuff either.

i've read my fair share of aristotle and I've written a research paper on the paintings of caravaggio, but i'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Rice is also one of the top schools. Top five I think? We're small.

simply put, an education used to be a value in and of itself. nobody asked "what does this have to do with my major?" or "how is this going to prepare me for the job market?"

jsbach, i would actually (gulp) recommend you put off architecture school until graduate school. (never thought i would EVER be saying this...)

get a decent, broad-based liberal arts education and take enough math and physics so that by the time you get to your m.arch, you will understand structures and environmental systems and the like.

and for your grad school (double gulp) go abroad if you can.

Whoa! there archinectors- the question by a spunky high school kid shouldn't have digressed into a 'my school is better then yours' pissing contest! Lets help this music lover figure out what it takes to become an architect.

First, Mark needs to learn how to prepare for architecture school regardless of where he applies next fall.

- So to answer their qustion, take as many art classes, and music classes, and more art classes (sculpture, art history, art theory, drawing, photography, dance and theatre) over the summer and next year. You need to start developing a portfolio. It is the most significant part of the application for getting into any good arch school.

Most schools don't expect freshman to start upper level classes in their major (or even declare one immediately)- so there are many opportunities to take more art and design classes in college before needing to submit the application to the architecture department.

See that wasn't a difficult question. Don't choose where you apply based on portfolio requirements. The best schools all ask for them, period.

Also don't follow the predictable best schools by US News route- look for the best place to develop your personal passions. don't follow the crowd!

And, while I love my alma mater, going to your state school for cheap is faaaar from the worst option out there. Part of me realizes that it would have been more practical to go to ASU and save my money for grad school.

Luckily, being a good designer doesn't require a dazzling knowledge of trivia. Not that knowledge isn't wonderful, of course.

Alternate undergrad advice: don't read Derrida. If others around you begin talking about Derrida, calmly look the for nearest exit. Avoid dead-end fixations. AVOID SOFT SCIENCES. We answer only to the laws of physics. Ground yourself in HARD sciences. We are concerned with materials. Chemistry. Thermodynamics. Objects that we design are made out of real things. Learn about the properties of those things, and through the properties you can determine the possiblities. That is how you can push the limits, because that's where the limits are.

Don't worry about arch. history: it only has answers for its own questions. There are new questions out there, and real problems to be solved. If your copy of Pattern Language is stolen before you can even read it, don't feel the need to replace it. Temper your material prowess with healthy doses of art. Sculpture. Painting. It's all form, texture, light, color, composition. We need that. Finally, just look at buildings. Stare.

if you want to go to UT-austin (which is "top-10" despite the utter and complete lack of a portfolio requirement) then THIS is what you need to do:

--get a killer SAT score (you still have some time if it's not great already). you will be weeded out below a certain level (at least for freshman admissions). don't question whether it's a good indicator of brains or not, just jack up that score.

--be in the top 10% of your class (you got that one covered). stay in the top 10% of your class.

--be good at something else besides school. show that you can FOCUS on something and excel at it. whether it is art or orchestra or theatre or football or snowboarding or whatever. you need to display that you can handle the rigors of architectural education. trust me, you have NO idea what you are getting into unless you've perhaps been raised as a competitive gymnast in romania.

at UT you will be thrown into the architecture pool immediately. your first semester has a full complement of architectural courses. YOU WILL BE RE-TAUGHT TO DRAW no matter how good you were/think you were in high school. computers are the great equalizer of architectural graphics these days...you don't have to know how to paint anymore.

squaresquared

try reading urbanbunker's post before making a retarded snipe.

"most" ivies (Columbia, Harvard, Yale, UPenn, etc.)

Hey jsbach

some schools to avoid

Wentworth
Drexel
Roger Williams
Florida
New School - San Diego

jsbach....some good "middle" schools

SUNY-Buffalo
Oregon
Washington
IIT
Rensselaer
OSU

wow. i've never responded to anything you've said before, parallel...save your nonsense for the less potentially impressionable. most of us can filter your drivel, while jsbachsonata is new to this, and may take your input at face value.

...or at least back up your comments. good luck with that.

I guess you're a Yalie AP, sorry your "drivel" didn't work on me.
I've been a critic at some of the schools I listed...so f-off

jsbach, find a copy of DI's architecture school guide

save your money...



legible?

someone's going to get a angry email from DI
Nevertheless, there ya go...nice job dot

i got cropped, but this is the DI ranking for BARCH programs for 2005.

The methodolgy was to interview employers to see which grads perform the best. I think is the least valuable method of evaluating schools since most employers don't really care where you went to school....unless you work for SOM.

p.s. if you don't see some of your favorite schools on here, it's prob bc they don't provide a 5-year BARCH degree....or bc they suck. I kid.