bump

I've posted a number of times about my experiences with a couple different schools' processes.

But as you say, the processes differ from school to school - as do the criteria on which the committees focus most, and the importance of various application parts.

In any school with which I'm familiar there is a committee -usually made up of a group of faculty, some or all of the architecture school or department's administration, and in some cases some student members. The committees typically meet several times - for example once a week over the course of 3 to 5 weeks. Between meetings some schools dole out the portfolio pile (or what remains of it after each of several "cuts") to members of the committee to review on their own time. Sometimes these people are expected to write up a few comments (usually just 2 or 3 sentences) about their overall impression of the candidate, and sometimes these people will also bookmark projects or pages in portfolios that they want others to look at next time the books get passed around the committee table.
In one variation on this I taught at a school that would leave all the portfolios in a "committee room" between meetings - sort of like the "team room" that the NAAB accreditation teams require for their visits. This way no portfolios were ever out/unavailable to the group. This also allowed faculty who weren't on the committee to visit the room and browse the applicants' portfolios and folders, and leave some comments if they wanted to.

Some of the materials that are requested - such as transcripts and test scores - may not end up being viewed by the committee in their original format. Sometimes the process is for the people processing the applications (generally secretarial staff) to create various spreadsheets - for example a sheet for each candidate, so that it's easy to see that person's statistics in a standardized format - and also spreadsheets of the test scores, GPA's, etc. of ALL of the candidates, so that's it's easy to compare and to see those who are toward the highs and lows of the applicant pool in terms of the various criteria.

There is not one person who makes final decisions (at least anywhere that I'm familiar with), but in some schools there is a tradition where the Dean has the option of hand-picking two or three applicants for admission. There is also sometimes a system where each faculty member gets a certain small number of "saves" in each cut - so that a person can be ranked low by most of the committee but still make it to the next round if one person champions them. Effectively there are some of these "saves" possible in the final round - which means that someone could make it in because one committee member strongly supports them - but this is not really likely because each round is a little more stringent and people don't usually keep saving applicants who really don't stack up to the others who make it through that round.

In my experience factors like GPA and GRE are truly minor considerations UNLESS they are unusually high or low, in which case they may be noticed and discussed. But, I've been told (and it has been reported on this forum adn others) that there are a few schools where these factors are used in an initial "qualifying" cut - sometimes before the applications make it to the architecture school or department. This would obviously only be possible in a program that shares its administration with other schools or departments - for example when the architecture department is part of the University's Graduate School as a whole, rather than being the "School of Architecture" specifically.

Certain other application parts - for example the statement of purpose and the rec letters - may not always be reviewed by the whole committee. That's because, if the committee follows more or less the procedures described above, there isn't really much time for reading during the committee meetings, so only the people who "sign out" that person's file might get a chance to really study it in-depth - and it's possible that every applicant will not make the rounds of every committee member (which would depend on the number of members and the number of meetings or redistributions of applicant materials, as well as how far the applicant got before being "cut"...)

Some of us "really know" about a small sub-set of schools. But there are over 100 architecture schools in the US alone, and probably none of us "really know" how all of them do things.

Well thanks Bloopox. I hope you didn't take my question as offensive. I can see that you "really know" about the process and I'm grateful for your response - it was exactly what I was looking for. I think it's better to be informed by someone with actual insight into the process than be mislead and possibly disappointed by the over-generalizations of archinectors making presumptions. I would never post my portfolio and change it a handful of times based on what anonymous posters I have never met think of it.

Do you have any idea how many applications places like GSD, MIT, UPenn and Yale receive? I have heard it can be over 400! I cannot imagine there are that many people interested in M.Arch programs, though I might be mistaken.

I know UCLA gets about 400 a year. Thats what the counselor told me when I visited so I imagine the other top schools have to get atleast that many but probably more. Especially GSD, it seems that everyone is applying there.

Well again it depends a lot on the school. But some of those on your list get in the range of 500 to 750 applications per year - though that's the combined total for all degree tracks (for instance first-professional M.Arch vs. post-pro M.Arch) in the architecture school.
You should remember though that almost all of the schools accept far more students than they think will decide to attend. For instance if they're trying to fill a 65-person class they may accept over 100 students, because they know that many will choose another school. So if you find out that a particular school has 65 students and gets 650 applicants per year, don't assume that it has only a 10% acceptance rate.

thanks for the replies

Bloopox, I have finished all of my applications but I don't know if I'm getting cold feet but I feel like I should maybe apply to a safety school. Two of my recommenders know the assoc. chair at the school and I feel like it would actually be one of those letters that they might actually read, but I have asked my recommenders to write 5 letters already and I would really hate to ask them to write another over a month later. Based on your comments, I was considering just sending everything sans rec letters but will an incomplete application not even be considered? To provide some context, it is a relatively new program but it's still gaining a lot of momentum becuase of its location and reputation in other design areas.

sounds like CCA.

If your recommenders already wrote 5 letters then I would think one more is no big deal. All they have to do is change a couple words, if any, and answer a couple questions. I would ask them for another if I were you.

it's your future on the line, not their relationship with you. Most recommenders will go out of their way to see you succeed. Asking for six letters is not very onerous, 10 on the otherhand is starting to push the limits.

Not to sound like a broken record, but: It depends on the school.

Most will send you postcards or phone you about missing components of the application, up to a couple weeks after their application deadline (which is typically when the committee starts to meet.)
Whether they will consider an application that's still missing parts at that point varies by school. I know that some schools do usually consider all "mostly complete" applications. But others don't. When I was applying to M.Arch programs years ago I got a postcard from one school asking for my fall semester grades (I han't submitted them with the original application because they weren't filed yet by the application deadline.) But in the time between applying and getting that postcard I had sort of re-thought my choices and wasn't very interested in the school anymore - so I just didn't send the requested transcript. A couple months later I got a rejection letter from that school, but it was not "we're sorry, all the applicants were unusually strong this year and it was a really difficult decision..." typical rejection letter. It stated that I could not be considered for admission because my application remained incomplete.

It seems to me that the best course of action in this case would be to call the school and ask. They're the only ones who can tell you what does and doesn't matter in their admission decisions.

you guys are totally right. it will pretty much be copying and pasting earlier versions. i guess i was hesitant becuase i really hate coming off disorganized or indecisive. i'm going to go ahead with the entire application becuase god forbid if i get rejected from everywhere i don't know that i would be able to pursue this whole architecture thing - i'm going to be 30 at grad as it is already.

shenks cp, tree, bloop!