As long as it is an accredited degree, it is accepted by NCARB. However, I found that the B.S.Arch + M.Arch degree gave me the option to choose a concentrated masters degree and gain knowledge into something I otherwise wouldn't have. IE: theory, sustainability, urban design, professional practice.

Are there cases where a registration board will not accept a B.Arch degree for the ARE?

On a more practical level, though, I've been seeing more and more firms explicitly state that job candidates for open positions should have an M.Arch. degree, especially for the more prestigious firms.

I've also heard rumors that NCARB plans to ditch the B.Arch. altogether, or at least quietly phase it out. Not sure if there's any truth to that, but it seems to be the way the wind is blowing.

It is my understanding that the NAAB is phasing it out, but that will take quite some time. At the moment, there are around 60 B.Arch programs in the US.

Texas A&M has ditched their BArch already. Actually, I think for a few years now. there are about 5 students in my graduate studio who went there. They explained that Texas A&M believes a student shouldn't be able to practice Architecture after 5 year, so, they created a 4+2 degree-"environmental design." Essentially, you go to A&M for 4 years and then start in level II at graduate schools. I figure this is a pretty common practice for other schools as well.
For me personally, I got a Business degree and did an architectureal design minor and then started my masters in architecture. I would like to run my own practice one day, so I figured a little business savy wouldn't hurt.

what's the reason to phase out the 5 year b.arch degree? i highly doubt schools like cornell with a strong undergraduate b.arch program would abandon their b.arch.

The reason would be that the demands of the profession in the contemporary world are for people who can do more coming out of school than draw pretty buildings. It helps if they can talk about interesting ideas coherently, or have some idea of how to function in the business world, or just do something other than participate in studio life.

Honestly, I'm suprised that it's taken this long -- it's only the commonwealth countries that still give bachelors degrees in medicine, and I don't think a bachelors of law means anything. If the AIA is worth anything, it'll start working on a program for a DA (doctor of architecture) which will be just like an MD or JD -- three years of school learning followed by three years of practice to get fully liscenced, with oppurtunities to specalize along the way.

while that may be the case, shimi-imi, Cornell has recently added the M.Arch 1 to their curriculum.


I recall reading a year or two ago that NAAB would not grant accreditation to new BArch programs (meaning that no school can start a 5yr BArch and have it accredited)...
*unfounded recollection.

but what if you got a b.arch and then went onto grad school to get an mba or something else? wouldn't that be more productive than getting a m.arch? (now that you have two professional degrees rather than one)

If you already have a B.Arch., then you wouldn't go to grad school for another professional degree. You could get an M.Arch. Option I, which would be a one-year program of advanced study in a specialized area. Or, as you mention, there'd be nothing stopping you from getting another masters such as an MBA, Masters of Urban Design, etc.

ah...you have missed the real issue. MONEY. the school (college of architecture) makes more money when go to grad school. the 5th year has always been a wierd thing for the university...b/c the uni wants the money...and does not give as much to the college.

one thing that does suck is that it is much harder to get into a school for the 2 year program than the 3 or 1 year ones.

in addition if you think about it there is an interesting issue with the fact that most 5 yr programs let the ones who can't enter the 5th year (grades or subpar work) get a 4 yr BED...the same you would get at a 4 yr.

my recommendation is get the 5 year if you are at a school that offers it. that way you masters can be only a year a little down the road. read some other posts as to how long it sometimes takes to get to grad school.

I think its a shame that they are phasing out the B.Arch.
The first reason is that I think it creates an unnecessary increase in cost to enter a profession that is already doesn't give enough compensation in relation to the hours you have to put in to get the degree and become a registered architect.

Also-a lot of the people going into Master's programs go straight through without taking a break-so they really aren't getting any more 'real world' experience than those in the 5 yr program.

AND- despite people jumping on the 'M.Arch only need apply' bandwagon-unless you have a degree from a big name school new graduates with either degree are more than likely to be starting at the same place in their new jobs. The M.Arch alone can't do anything that a BArch cant do.

I have no regrets about doing a 5 yr program, and I feel that it is a mistake to banish the undergrad architecture degree. I think that NCARB should only award one degree- but that you should be able to get in 5 yrs or 4+3.

I had to answer this question a lot when I met prospective students at my alma mater...

While NCARB allows recognizes a 5 Year B.Arch, or an M. Arch from 4+2 program or an M. Arch from a 3 year Graduate School (for those with an unrelated bachelor's degrees), the intern ship hows required to be eligible to sit for IDP are slightly different. I believe, currently, a M.Arch reduces the total number of hours required for IDP, what works out to be about 6 months less time than the "average"...but, then again, you are at school for an additional year or two over the 5 year plan. So it really is up to you as to how you want to get there.

Also, AP is right. NAAB is not issuing accrediation to any new programs that wish to use a 5-year B.Arch curriculum; new programs will only be certified if they follow a M. Arch course ucture.

wow...bad typing... "the internship hours required...."

actually, the NAAB isn't trying to get rid of 5-year programs. all they want to get rid of is the nomenclature : b.arch. hence, it is now possible to go to well established schools of architecture, like tulane, for five years right out of high school and get an M.Arch degree. i personally think its silly, but then, i also think its silly that you can study economics in undergrad, and then become a 'master' of architecture with only three additional years of study (at some places).

really, its just a ploy by the NAAB to increase the appearance prestige of the profession by making sure everyone is a 'master'. i'm sure that the NAAB is fully aware that some of the best practicing professionals today hold a b.arch as their only professional degree (or their only degree period). and some of the most distinguished schools of architecture like cooper and cornell still have b.archs as the cornerstones of their schools.

also, to be nit-picky, you need to look at the number of credit hours required for most b.arch programs and most m.arch 4+2 programs. i think that you will find that they are the same.

I got a 4 yr and was just given my authorization to test. Have fun with your fancy art school loans sukas.

Seriously - Architects waste more time in school than its worth. Design is great but in the end Studio is not why society grants you a license to practice.

in Canada, the B.Arch has been phased out for awhile now. Most schools, have essentially created a Bach. Environmental Design which looks at design with a wider scope. There are a few remaining schools the offer a B.Sc (Arch).....which for what I can tell, is similar to the B.ED

J, you are right...it is getting the post-professional masters that reduces the IDP hours...my bad

I have a Barch and a March. It all depends on the school and the maturity of the student.

I actually get a lot of better work from my staff that had a 2 year associate’s than the ones with a 4 year BS Architecture studies – (many of them Midwestern schools who should be not named to protect the tenure track at these schools). To date, not enough data on the master’s hires.

Basically what I am getting at it that I’d like to see the Barch retained and be the basic degree for licensure. The masters should be something separate (and hopefully better) but not required, and lastly more focus on paraprofessionals having 2 year degrees that have a whole other career path