i can't speak for GaTech, but Maryland IS too conservative, too focused on classical architecture and neo-urbanism and is embarrassingly behind in technology.

arm,

being that i live 40 minutes from college park's campus and was admitted into there program a while back, i'd say that it's awful(the undergrad that is). they make you take way too many "core" classes that are a load of shit. you don't even get into real design courses untill fall of your junior year. i have two professors that went there and all they do is talk down on the pogram. stay away from it, and besides, the area around the campus is dangerous as hell.

I got an undergrad degree in architecture there in 2001. I found it to be a very grounded and comprehensive (if a little ...er... cautious) introduction to the discipline. The faculty were pretty diverse, and the greatest thing there might have been the students. Many of the people I met are still among my best friends, it was a super smart and broad minded bunch.

I can't speak much to the graduate program, but based on what I saw of it while an udergrad it was definitely not a classical school. If anything, High Modernism was popular. Urbanism there tended slightly to the New end of the spectrum, but there was definitely support for good work that wasn't even remotely Historicist.

They've switched Deans since I've been through, though, so YMMV.

I'm a current graduate student there, and yes Dean Rockcastle is amazing but...

It blows. Way too conservative. Resistence to technology. all in all retarded. As amazing as the dean is, if the rest of the school is terrified of change and a progressive pedagogy the school is still doomed.

I got into much better schools and ended up at UMD as a matter of convience (DC) area and now I am planning to transfer (ie loosing money and time) because of this POS.

Highly UNRECOMMENDED.

i can't comment on maryland at all- i don't know anything about it.

i did an m.arch.ii at gatech and i would highly recommend it. i thought it was very well rounded, with a good groups of teachers. you'll find many threads on the school here. ellen dunham jones is the director of the school, and she's the best. can't say enough good things about her. a few years back they got an endowment for a chair from tom ventulett, and have brought some known names through that to teach. they also opened a masters in urban design- i don't know how that's going. ellen is a member of the cnu but she argues for it as an urban design tool- not pushing for the conservative tacky aesthetics.

also, about 5 years ago there was a new development that linked the school to a new urban area within midtown. it was pretty isolated when i was there, but now there are more alternatives. gatech is in the middle of atlanta, next to midtown, but about 99.9% of people use cars. i was part of the 0.1%. you'll probably still want a car although i would argue a bike might be enough.

there's also the beltline project to consider, although i don't know if that will ever happen. hopefully sometime it will and will bring some much needed public transportation alternatives to atlanta.

there are some good places to work in atl if you care to stay and the school usually travels well and is well regarded mostly everywhere- it has a good name with employers. what i heard inside atl was that people hire southern tech guys for their technical knowledge and gatech guys are known as "designers". what i heard in new york was that they liked gatech graduates.

if you have any particular questions on the school, i'll be glad to answer them although i graduated a while ago...but i've sort of kept in touch with the school.

hi aml :)

hi vado : )

Hi you two!

That sucks if that's really the direction UMD's program is headed. Can any other alumni/current students comment?

I guess it just to show you that it pays to do lots of research on your chosen program, to make sure you won't be transferring out after a year (not just on archinect, either, right guys?)

Just one further example that I think is indicative of the mentality:

Every year undergraduate seniors who have at least 2 A's in studio after their 3rd semester of studio (undergrads start studio junior year) receive a letter from the associate dean granting them unconditional acceptance to the graduate program. These students don't have to submit a portfolio, fill out an application, or even take the GRE's (I'm 90% sure on the last one). So what happens is you have all of these students, some of whom probably wouldn't even be continuing on in the field who matriculate into the graduate program just because all they have to do is show up. Great.

And 1/2 of the new faculty who have been hired are graduates of the same program. hmm.

I'm really not trying to bash the school, there are people there who have great ideas and are trying to improve things but the environment makes any kind of progressive pedagogy extremely difficult.

And @765 I wouldn't say this is the direction they are NOW taking...it is more like this is the direction they have had for the last 2 decades...

i just took a spin around the maryland website and it looks okay to me. the real problem with both programs is the continual overrating of their sports teams.

Hah! Careful vado, Terps fans can get a little enthusiastic about their loyalties ...

... and @ Euper (Upper Peninsula?), I don't think you're trying to bash the school, sounds like you had a really bad experience and should've checked it out a little more. Your correct usage of the word 'matriculate' show's you're an intelligent and thoughtful person. ;]

Like I said my observations of the grad program (from an undergrad's level) were limited to noting a fondness for Le Corbusier and Jane Jacobs, and a certain cautiousness about The Computer. I thought it looked like a good program four years ago, I'd be interested in hearing more about anything that's changed.

(Don't all schools like to keep their best undergrads, though, and hire from their grad pool? I'm just saying ...)

Hey guys,

Thanks for all of your responses. I actually decided on Georgia Tech and I started this past summer.

However, I still think about what it would've been like if I had gone to Maryland. I guess it's because I like the DC area more than ATL. (MARTA is terrible, everything is so spread out, and it is hot as hell here!)

Also, the director of Maryland's program, Brian Kelly, put a lot of effort into trying to recruit me, so I felt like I was wanted at Maryland, as opposed to Tech, which didn't even have an open house of any sort. I had to fly up to Atlanta on my own and roam around the building, looking for people to talk to.

I still feel like I'm just a number here at Tech, because there are so many students in the program. The building is overcrowded and studio space is limited.

Nevertheless, I feel like I chose the better overall program.

But how much emphasis should I place on better facilities, and better student to teacher ratio, which I think Maryland had?

Comments are appreciated.

I'm in a similar boat w/ my grad. school decision making. I got into Maryland's program as well and decided not to go there for various reasons (absolutely hating college park being one of them.) But, ultimately it came down to 2-schools for me. Clemson and UW in Seattle. Two very different programs and settings to say the least. The problem that I faced was that Clemson offered me some serious financial incentive and several "we want you bad conversations" where as UW did not. I almost chose to go to Clemson because of the financial situation and because they really seemed to want me, but ended up choosing UW anyway simply because Seattle and the arch program lined up the best with what I was looking for. Clemson only hit the financial mark and a bit of an ego boost for me - and in the end that wasn't enough to sway my decision. So - I guess my point is that I think if you chose the program that is best for you and what you were looking for - then you made the right choice, even if there are other attractive things about the program you didn't choose. there will always be things other programs have that yours doesn't...

arm... you definitely made the right choice...

I was considering Maryland at one point too, but decided to go to VT in Blacksburg. It's not the best architectural setting, but the arch school has an extremely good reputation and I actually liked the rural setting. It landed me many good job offers too! :)

Others I considered per acceptance: Syracuse, Clemson, Maryland, Ohio State, Texas, NC State, Pratt, Sci-Arch, and Miami of Ohio.

In the end, I thought VT was the best fit for me.

I studied architecture at Maryland at both the undergrad and graduate levels in the late 90's and early 00's. Although many of the comments above are on target, they strike me as unusually negative. (Seems like a bad experience or two).

The school's pedagogy can be considered conservative (or radical depending on who you're speaking with!) because it is rooted in a Colin Rowe-inspired approach to urbanism and a post/high modern approach to architecture. Regardless of the professors' zeal for their pedgagical mission, I found that both the students and work itself were excellent, and easily competitive with other schools that I have since visited and juried at, both in the US and abroad.

My classmates (and I) have since gone on for graduate studies and post-graduate fellowships at Yale, the GSD, MIT, Columbia, Sci-Arc, Berkeley, and abroad through the Fulbright program. Many have also worked at amazing offices. As 765 noted above, the students may have been the best part.

The recent work I see on the school's website troubles me, however because it is not nearly as good as the work that came out of the school in the late 1990's. It is also true that when I was there, the shop and computer resources were not competitive with many other programs (sounds like this hasn't changed based on comments above).

Most architecture programs out there (particularly at the state universities) are in constant flux as new students of varying levels of ability pass through their doors and even professors switch from school to school (especially as the tenure process becomes increasingly insane). The ONLY option for a potential student is to visit the school, check out the work and most importantly, talk to a variety of current students.