In the USA a MSc is a non-professional degree usually for those who have an undergrad professional degree. If I'm understanding you correctly, you are about to get your second non-professional degree in architecture and want to get a professional one in the USA?

It is easier to have tuition waived or subsidized if you already have a professional degree since it is a much shorter term of enrollment and you will most likely be a GTA. Those positions are also usually competitive. They sometimes hand out academic or minority scholarships too depending on which of their statistics they are looking to improve.

Getting two non-professional degrees sounds a lot like I have been wasting my time. I understand that a BSc. (3years) is not equivalent to a BArch (4years), but a (BSc. +  MSc.) > BArch? And since a MArch after a BArch is nonsense (as I understand it), the only viable option for me would be to pursue a MArch II. (2 years). Is that correct? Is the MArch II even an accredited program?

Should I be considered for a GTA position (~20h/week), will I still be able to handle the workload of the Master program? I am not really interested in titles and credits, I am looking to learn something. So to get back to my original question: will pursuing a MArch II benefit me more than getting my hands dirty in a professional practice?

The AA MArch is similar to a post-professional degree in the states and does not lead to licensure in any country.  If you enter the DipArchitecture at the AA [which is an undergraduate 2 year programme] it would exempt you to RIBA part II - however the AA requires you have Part I before you enter or complete year 1 and this requires separate application to ARB or entering final year of the Part I.

You should consider whether you wish to be officially licensed as an architect in the country you wish to work - depending on your educational background there is nothing stopping you to formally apply for licensure without any additional degree in architecture - it may take you £££ or $$$ and time but that's all.  

If you work while going to graduate school it most likely will hurt your final results - so its a balance.

To work in specialization areas of architecture often requires degrees such as MSc so work a bit in the area of the MSc before you abandon it-

 Getting two non-professional degrees sounds a lot like I have been wasting my time. I understand that a BSc. (3years) is not equivalent to a BArch (4years), but a (BSc. +  MSc.) > BArch? And since a MArch after a BArch is nonsense (as I understand it), the only viable option for me would be to pursue a MArch II. (2 years). Is that correct? Is the MArch II even an accredited program?

Just a side note to help you as you compare programs - no, the BSc. is not equivalent to a B.Arch - which is a 5-year professional degree; it is, however, more or less equivalent to a BA in Arch (Bachelor of Arts in Architecture), which is another 4 year undergrad non-professional degree.  (Athough, I've heard that supposedly a BSc. in Arch is considered slightly more advantageous when applying to professional Master's programs?  Supposedly? I think this is why some undergrad programs switched from a BA to a BSc.)  (And here, although the actual BSc coursework only takes 3 years, in the states it is considered a 4 year degree as it is typically accompanied by a year of general education requirements and our university system doesn't really distinguish anything under 4 years.)

As for: (BSc. +  MSc.) > BArch?

That's a weird question because nobody I know has ever done it.  You normally only take the MSc. after you already have your (5-year professional) B.Arch.  Therefore you don't need a professional masters... so you take the MSc.  So I guess, from the point of view of being able to practice in the US or Canada via a professional degree program, yes, the B.Arch > BSc. + MSc. 

You should consider whether you wish to be officially licensed as an architect in the country you wish to work - depending on your educational background there is nothing stopping you to formally apply for licensure without any additional degree in architecture - it may take you £££ or $$$ and time but that's all.

Although I agree with TED & always appreciate his/her comments - one tweak here.  You should know that there are very limited opportunities in the States to practice Architecture without a professional degree.  In some States you can still do it (IL for example), but it's a minority of states, and some of the few remaining are phasing it out (such as I believe CA IIRC).  $ and time won't help you in that case unless they are going toward completing a professional degree.  The states that still allow it generally do so on the basis of years worked; for example, IIRC back in the day CA required 13 years of work experience before application for licensure without a degree.

Hey mantaray :-)

Award titles are meaningless and have no universal accepted standard - a University writes the descriptors  but what is important is if its tie to either the prescription of the profession - US or UK has more meaning.  In the UK a BA[Hons] Architecture can be the first stage of professional qualification [RIBA Part i] but is 3 years as Brits do 'A' levels on chosen specialist students during the last 2 years of what is equivalent to hight school and go through painful test as admission to Uni. In fact, many US schools have offered post-award  MArchs to students successfully completing the 5 year BArchs.  

I value proper Master studies that are not in the professional track over those in the MArch I, II or III tracks or the Part II track in the UK - these are true graduate studies where criticality, creativity and depth of enquiry allows an individual to pursue depth of topics which is not compromised with the burden of the profession.  The growth of MArch's in the states came in the early 80's where the 4+2 was pushed by east coast schools pre-madona's.

In the UK there are QAA benchmark standards which set qualitative standard to level of cognitive learning that needs to be achieved within level 7 standards[Masters].  The Diploma part II at the AA is a level 6 standard and is not at graduate level. The majority of the remainder of Part II courses in the UK are at postgraduate level 7.

Having taught at graduate level in the US, I would suggest Arch post grad course are  are at level 6, particularly those courses which do not have a written dissertation in the range of 15k words.

One needs to recognise the most important learning outcome of a university experience is not the cool building you design but its depth of enquiry and one's ability to document methodology, argument, conclusions, etc. 

Evidence: just look at  post on archinect where the first question on the school is alway on the job prospects not on the relationship of research or scholarly activities of the Uni.  Unis then follow 'the customer satisfaction' with marking escalation [who comes out of the GSD without an A average?]

So the upshot of it is:

-one should get a professional degree in the country one has the ambition to work in,

-or else put in a lot of time and (pecuniary) effort to the end of evaluating the received education and examining it's qualitative equality to a domestic education.

-and try to really get to the bottom of it instead of merely churning out designs.

(without wanting to appear abrasive I feel the need to correct a word: it is called "prima donna".)

Does this mean that I won't be able to find work in an office in the US without the appropriate NAAB accreditation? You appear to be very knowledgeable when it comes to the quality of tuition. Which are in your eyes the foremost institutions or settings where one would most likely gain a more profound understanding about architecture after a MSc.?

Does this mean that I won't be able to find work in an office in the US without the appropriate NAAB accreditation?

My understanding (which has certainly been true in my own experience both as job seeker and employer) is that non-NAAB degree holders are at a huge disadvantage in the job market (unless their portfolio is really spectacular). A portfolio full of really amazing, elite-class work trumps everything else (and is also an extreme rarity among entry-level candidates with little or no work experience), but lacking that you need to at least have an accredited degree.

We've reached the point where there are so many people competing for architecture jobs that employers are having to use ruthless filtering on the heaping piles of resumes that land in our inboxes. Spelling mistakes? Your resume goes in the trash. Poor layout or readability? Round file. Non-NAAB degree? Why should I even look closer at you when I have dozens or maybe even hundreds of accredited-degree applicants sitting in the same pile?

That's what you're up against. Hiring managers are having to slog through hundreds of resumes weekly. When you submit your credentials and portfolio in a job application, you'll be lucky if you get more than about a 10- to 20-second scan for obvious disqualifiers.

Well-said, TED, and I totally agree, particularly with your thoughts on the value and direction of one's post-grad studies (and on the disparity in quality/emphasis here in the States).

To the OP: NCARB (for better or for worse, this is the organization that most US states have contracted with to vet candidates for licensure) works with NAAB (the body which works to enforce a recognized standard of architectural education quality across degree-granting institutions in NA) to grant degree evaluations to accreditation-seekers from abroad.  There is a process for it - would probably help you to look up their process / call them for more info. (I know of several license-holders who completed their educations in India, with varying degrees, for example.)  There may be some precedent for folks with your combination of degrees being granted NAAB education-equivalent.  Here's the pertinent text from NCARB's website:

Standard Path
If you do not qualify for the BEFA or choose to pursue the traditional path toward licensure, the three main requirements you must fulfill to be licensed in a U.S. jurisdiction include education, experience, and examination.

Recognize that not all jurisdictions have adopted NCARB's education and experience standards. All questions regarding your eligibility must be directed to your jurisdiction’s registration board.

Your first step will be to apply for an NCARB Record.
If applying as a BEFA candidate, please select the “Foreign Architect” option.  If applying for the traditional path of EESA/IDP/ARE, please select the “Intern” option.

Education
Many registration boards require applicants to have a professional degree from a program accredited by the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). Foreign-educated individuals who do not hold such a degree should have their education evaluated by NAAB through their Education Evaluation Services for Architects (EESA) program.

Hi.. i have scored 141 in Quant, 151 in Verbal & 3 on AWA. How good is this for an MS HRM program in the USA?? I also have 8.5 years work-ex in HR with companies like Oracle and alike and a GPA of 3.5

Will this help me get admissions or should I retake?