If I make the winter deadlines, I'll enroll Fall 2013 at age 34. If I don't, then it's Fall 2014 at age 35. Am I too old for this?
My undergrad degree is in classics and I have an MFA in painting. I'm an artist. My work is in shows and I teach at the college level. Despite these degrees of success, I can't make a living and anyway, my interest has shifted from art to buildings, cities, and economics.
I'm cognizant of the ideals of lifelong learning, following my heart, and using maturity as leverage. But I'm also aware that after three years of the M.Arch, I'll be 37-38 - then interning at 40 with 20-something kids. Will I be too old? If so, in what ways? How would I compensate for this?
not too old, lots of people go back to school at that age.
As everybody knows, the profession is currently in shambles, so I would weigh the reality of that before you make a 100k commitment into a field with no jobs.
If you still decide to make the leap, the age difference dosen't really matter much, in fact, I think you might be at an advantage because the 20 somethings are rather unfocused in their first professional settings anyways.
I would say added age brings added experience, understanding and added value.
Achieving high levels in your studies - and networking within the profession throughout the course will give you the best opportunities after graduation.
I finished the M.Arch in 2008, at the age of 47, and have had no luck finding work in the profession. I can't say for sure if age had anything to do with it, because addressing the age issue is a complete no no from an employers' standpoint. The possibility they could be sued for descrimination precludes ANY chance of this issue being discussed with them in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly.
The best answer you'll get to this is on a forum, such as here, but I wouldn't count on getting a straight answer from anyone here who would actually be in charge of hiring, it's just too controversial.
Architecture is a very slow profession, both culturally and professionally, and by professionally, I mean the two-pronged learning curve: My empirical research indicates that you'll need three years professional, i.e., in an office setting, (in today's market) of AutoDesk AutoCad, AutoDesk Revit, AutoDesk 3D Max, Adobe Creative Suite, SketchUp, Rhino, etc to even be considered for an entry level intern position. And all this on top of that M. Arch degree. And as far as I know, none of these are part of required coursework in any M.Arch program that I am aware of. (could be wrong about this) In other words, these are skills you would have to acquire on your own, in addition to your coursework.
And that is just to qualify for what's known as "production work," the entry level people who actually create the CDs (Construction Documents, in Arch lingo). After you've passed this phase, you'd (ostensibly) move into the second prong: management, which means dealing with, and eventually winning, clients. Generally speaking, production level people are not going to be given the opportunity to develop this skill set for a number of years, not when tens of thousands in fees are at stake, and could be eviscerated in seconds by the unpracticed lips of an intern, although it's not unheard of for some to just naturally possess this skill. Management personnell have often spent decades studying and learning the satraps involved in winning the tens of thousands in fees (and millions in construction costs) to "dance" at this level, because that's how long it takes.
So, I don't mean to discourage you, and maybe the economic picture will be better by the time you finish, but I thought I'd give you as accurate a picture of what it takes, albeit from my perspective. Granted, I've never spent even one hour working in an architectural office, so there's your grain of salt.
I went back to school at 35. I have completed my undergrad and am now in Masters. So I will be close to 40 when I graduate. So we are in the same boast so to speak. I can't tell you that you are too old, or that it will impact your employment opportunities as I really have no idea. But from my own experience so far I can say that when I was looking for a work term position my age was never mentioned as a negative, and in fact my 11ish years experience in the workforce was seen as a positive.
Am I worried looking for work when I graduate, of course I am. I think every student does. But firms will hire you based on your skills, experience, and personality compatibility. So make sure you get the skills that firms are looking for, work on outside projects get some experience (student competitions and the like), the personality part well thats just common sense.
At the end of the day I think going back to school was one of the best decisions for me. I couldn't imagine being 75 and having a "what if" in my life. I have always wanted to be an Architect, I am "following my heart" and my goals, and I'm not going to let a little thing like age stand in my way.
not an issue for school, maybe an issue in the reality of the workforce. there could be age discrimination, but maybe it is harder to deal with the low wages that architects start with more than anything.
as for the software, all that stuff is normally learned by doing at university. none if it is hard. knowing what to do with the software is why experience is preferred or required. in current market that is hard to come by, sadly. although to be fair, the same can be said of most any job in a big chunk of the world right now.
Age discrimination is on the increase as society becomes more social Darwinist - a Ryan and Romney win will only throw gasoline on the fire - You need to move fast before things get worse - 35 is young - hell I graduated with M.Arch at 54 and got hired by SOM that day - in 2007 - that will never happen in this climate - If I did it at 54 and I have 4 years exp. now - you can do it at 35.
I think you are too old to get into the business through traditional means (school, internship, entry level job, toiling away in a cubicle, etc...) but if you have the experience, the drive, and the knowledge (can always get that from seminars and books) you should be able to transition into the industry without re-starting your career.
What I would do is start moving your work more in the direction you want to go. Take some Architecture and Design seminars so you know how to "talk the talk", and take individual classes for things you need help in (CAD, etc).
Thanks for these responses so far. Really specific and helpful and I am re-reading them now.
I'm not worried about the salary. I've read that entry level interns earn mid-40s salaries. That's more than twice what I make as an adjunct lecturer and artist. But the economic forecast and job markets do worry me.
To Nicholas: why, in particular, do you think I am too old? Do you mean because of age discrimination in hiring? Or do you mean something different?
so its easier to become an architect with nothing but a pocket full of passion and a night class in cad than it is if a person goes to school and gets educated professionally with an accredited degree?
no offence to the folks who take the path lest travelled but if i were asked to choose between the two i'd be hiring the person with the professional degree and a bit of a clue...
It is hard to say when someone is too old with retirement age always being pushed back and whatnot, but it really depends what you want to do with your second career. When you consider that most people receiving the AIA "Young Architects" awards are around 40 and graduated at 25, you are looking at 15 years (if everything goes well) to advance sufficiently far that you have your own practice. You could maybe shrink that to 8-10 years since you have experience running a business. Hitting the prime of your career (about 15 years into it) when you are 65 sounds pretty unappealing to me, but to each his own.
I don't want to dissuade you from pursuing architecture, but you do not need to go to school to be successful at this.
No firms is going to want to give you IDP hours when they could spend the same investment getting a young intern the hours who will stay for many more years.
You will never compete with young interns when it comes to technology and CAD programs, parametric design, etc...
However, like I said, you have business, project management, and real world experience which are some of the most valuable assets you can have when applying to a small to mid size firm.
Don't try to go to school and get into architecture through the path that a traditional student would - you simply can't compete. Instead, exploit your life and work experience to offer something unique in the architecture market.
Aug 20, 12 5:29 pm ·
·
I think what he is trying to say is that there are other ways to be involved in the "industry" of making buildings without necessarily becoming an "architect." It is possible to be an artist and have a significant impact on some buildings or the built environment in general. Names like Olafur Eliasson and Robert Irwin immediately spring to mind. And some architects (Herzog & de Meuron amongst others) have often worked with artists too. That's not a bad approach (assuming the original poster has at least some talent as an artist).
Also, I'm inclined to doubt that the age matters so much as the temporal context. In other words, regardless of age, I think 2012 is a shitty time to become an architect (unless you got a lot of cash in the bank to finance the schooling).
Entry level interns who find full time work in New York might make in the mid 40s. On the other hand, I've heard the going rate for a part time intern with MArch in-hand in LA or Chicago is $8 an hour. So you might want to be a bit more thorough in your analysis of current market conditions.
You should also think about how well your work ethic will fit with the ethos of design school. Most of your peers will be able to fit the mold and make up for their slacking off until the last minute by pulling multi-night all nighters at the last minute. Can your body take that stress? I went in at 28 with the assumption that I could just act like an adult and finish my work in a timely fashion, but frequently the faculty weren't prepared with assignments far enough in advance to make that possible.
You could consider just trying to find work in a firm -- many states still allow you to obtain a license with just work experience. At $8 an hour by you could finish a license in about the same time, and end up about $70k in earnings and $100K in debt you didn't have to take in front of the game.
No firms is going to want to give you IDP hours when they could spend the same investment getting a young intern the hours who will stay for many more years.
- True - 4 years experience and no IDP credit " you don't have enough runway in front of you"
"You will never compete with young interns when it comes to technology and CAD programs, parametric design, etc... "
False - I was 54 when I graduated, and I was fully up on the latest BIM technology and have been doing parametric modeling for 25 years and am able to keep up with the young turks at SOM and work all night if need be. Then again, I run 35 miles/week and am as fit as Paul Ryan
At least I am working as long as I don't have to interview with NIcholas Cecchi who believes in age discrimination -
"Don't try to go to school and get into architecture through the path that a traditional student would - you simply can't compete. Instead, exploit your life and work experience to offer something unique in the architecture market."
Again - BS - I graduated near the top of my class at 54'
I knew I had the right idea to visit this forum. Thank you to everyone! I am reading you closely.
@mespellrong: my vision of grad design projects was similar: "I'm mature and won't set myself up for all nighters." I hadn't considered ill-prepared (or sadistic) faculty. But I'm more worried about the $8/hour intern positions you mention. How are you supposed to earn IDP hours through a part-time job?
@Nicholas: "You will never compete with young interns when it comes to technology and CAD programs, parametric design, etc..." For similar reasons as the IDP hours? Or is it an old dog/new tricks dilemma? I'm enrolling in an AutoCAD course; no way that could hurt.
@everyone on money: the art market was great from 2004-2008, but it's bad now except for the artists working at the very top. In my view.
Did any of you have older classmates during M.Arch? Did you work with older interns? If so, what's your take?
if you have been adjunct teaching, I'm sure you know exactly how well prepare faculty are capable of being. You also know it probably isn't their fault -- it is hard to be well prepared when you get a course assignment a week after the course has started, you are paid by the hour, and you are getting paid to only teach it once. I'll point out that there are many times as many full-time jobs in academia for painters in the last few years as for architects, and in most places they are on the same pay scale.
IDP says you only have to work 16 hours a week to register the hours. if you did that regularly, you would still be pretty close to the median when you finished your license seven years after graduation.
I had four classmates above 35 at the start of my program, none of them made it.
I am not saying that he CANNOT learn these things, simply that it is a much more efficient use of his time and resources to capitalize on skills he already has that will serve him well in architecture. These include Business Management, Conceptual Design, Client Interactions, managing time, money, and project resources, and the myriad things that keep projects and offices moving forward.
As far as "not being able to compete" the truth in the vast majority of cases is that if you are not born into a wealthy family, you will not have the same opportunities as your M.Arch classmates. They will be taking unpaid internships with prestigious firms, attending additional design and CAD seminars out of pocket, buying $10,000 programs, do not have to work during school, etc, etc... I based my comments on the assumption you will need to keep some semblance of a life running while you are in school and shortly after.
Xenakis - You may not be representative of the population in that someone with a tech history and exceptional drive will be highly motivated to learn CAD programs, whereas the original poster does not seem to be that type of person. If the ultimate goal is to get to a position where he is designing buildings, knowing CAD is only one of many possible intermediate steps. I am not going to get into a debate on the value of knowing how to operate design tools (am a big proponent of this), but just because the archinect community is big on emerging digital technologies does not mean that every firm will be.
You seem to be an exception to the rule as most non-traditional students I went to school with did not even make it through. The one that did is a waiter.
Please do not take my comments as ageist or discriminatory, I am simply being honest in the spirit of an open and frank discourse.
Nicholas - Your comments are welcome - the only problem I have is IDP - seems like the whole architecture community is in lock step about not wanting to sign off on 4 years of my experience - they say "what are going to use it for? - you don't have enough runway" After 4 years of struggle, I have had to fight my way to stay afloat - the recession and all it's unfairness has only increased my will and I will never give up.
I was always most impressed with the architects who are not actually licensed, but hire a licensed architect to sign off on their ideas. Like they are just way too busy being incredible designers to even think about wasting time getting a license.
Perhaps you (xenakis) are focusing only on licensure when you could explore other options for getting where you want to be. This is the same thing I am suggesting the op investigate.
Open and frank discourse is preferable; this is my life! I do not have a tech history. I've learned Photoshop because I use it regularly, but I've never needed anything beyond that. Moreover, I'm a painter, and most painters, in my view, are not "project-oriented." It's possible that I'm a worse-case scenario in Nicholas' forecast. None of this discussion makes up my mind for me, but it gives me new dimensions to consider.
mbooberalles -- I am the principal in our firm responsible for all hiring. Over the years, we've received credentials from a number of candidates who switched to architecture after taking a different initial degree and then working in another discipline for a few years. All else being equal, I've always wanted to meet these candidates because they can bring a maturity, discipline and degree of seasoning to the work place. Typically, they also know EXACTLY why they want to work in architecture, unlike some younger grads, who still may be trying on architecture to see how it fits.
The primary challenge is ALWAYS compensation. Again, all else being equal, we cannot pay much, if any premium, for an older candidate right out of school -- you won't receive much, if any, credit for your work experience in other areas of your life. If that's a big problem for you, I would not go this direction.
While your starting pay is likely to be comparable to any other recent grad with comparable skills and portfolio, I will say that the older candidates we've hired in the past have progressed somewhat faster than their younger colleagues. I attribute this to the characteristics I outline in my first paragraph above. But, you can't expect to substitute "maturity" for "capability" -- at the end of the day, you must compete with your younger colleagues on the basis of contribution. If you cant' do that, it will be hard to make a case to bring you on board, or keep you on board.
This is perhaps a harsh assessment, but it is one based on personal experience. We've had some wonderful staff members who came to us while starting a second phase of their career and some of those have been very, very successful. But, it's always a challenge -- both for the individual and for the firm.
I don't know - I spent over 50 years with rose colored glasses on or am oblivious to negative realities some say I don't have any common sense - my younger sister is retired and spends her time swimming across the Golden Gate - people call her a fool too "don't you know the sharks will eat you or a container ship will run you over"- must be the genes. inregards to both my sister and I we both find out what it takes and do it - you can't just try - try is the road to failure - What ever choice you make - don't try - just do it
@quizzical: Thank you! Hearing about maturity vs. capability does resonate. And thank you on behalf of a potential future version of me, who would be an older applicant looking for employers with open minds.
Aside from my age, software is my weakest point. I am very good at perspective and drafting by hand, but that might seem quaint in many firms. I never needed to learn Revit, Rhino, CAD, etc. Sounds like I should get started immediately if I want to compete. Even if I don't end up pursuing an M.Arch, those tools might be useful in other ways.
It seems like M.Arch admission (or rejection) might be telling. Would an M.Arch program really admit someone who is too old (or unskilled) to compete in the job market? Schools need alumni to succeed.
The evidence is that schools do not need those they admit to succeed. Most fail out two out of three they admit, and of the grads, not many pass the exams. Just consider the proportion of 100,000 licsences vs. 25,000 students enrolling annually.
Too old is not a huge problem the main question is can you afford a mistake and a start over, if you leave art and teaching behind for a while could you pick it up again? Do you have plans for state or private? Full time or part time?
school hours are not hard, wouldn't worry about it. real world is a lot harder than school can ever be.
wouldn't sweat CAD either. It's not that hard to pick up ACAD and once you have that (or similar) the rest of the software becomes easier. not sure about learning C+. some of my students make programs and work with grasshopper and rhino and so on, but i still don't see them doing anything with those skills after graduation. the guys i see doing more on programming side in profession are the urban planning types. at least for now.
perspective by hand is not likely to come up unless you go to ye oldey timey university. i suppose you will have an advantage with photoshopping and presentations, which is not bad thing to have as skill goes.
as for universities they do not care if you can get a job, same as art school, really.
Will, the large firms that do stadium design will have a team of grasshopper folks, but it doesn't seem that they actually get much past the basic functionality of grasshopper (scripting even in that situation has limited use).
However, we have been playing around w/ Revit plug-ins as of late to to get some xtra functionality out of Revit. Not much new scripting going on but more tweaking a few things from something off the web to get better results. That being said, the amount of time spent on this stuff in almost every firm is miniscule compared to how much effort people put into it in school.
If you are going to get into it, I recommend Python over C+.
And yeah, my most succesful quarters in school were when I was holding down a part-time job in my last year. You just have to get the hang of time-management. First year was tough for me though, people's milage will vary. Also, one the best Revit guys at my firm is in his 50s; he can keep up / pass the best of us.
I think it's ok to go for the march as long as you can keep your debt down. If you are prepared to go overseas, there are opportunities and money to be made.
Grasshopper for stadiums? I was working partime for an office on the 49er stadium in Santa Clara and all of it is in Revit - the pime architect HNTB, did 49er stadium and memorial stadium in Berkeley in Revit. I can see how grasshopper could solve a lot of design issues though. Do you work for HOK-sport?
I do not think you are a "worst-case scenario." I actually think you are in a great position to switch to architecture. I don't mean to be coming of as negative on this whole idea - all I am saying if that your pursue architecture through an academic experience that is heavily skewed towards the talents and attitudes of young people, you will have a hell of a time.
You obviously have alot of strengths currently, so use those instead of embarking on something you have no experience with.
Your maturity and outside experience would be enough of a reason for me to hire you alone.
Just consider the proportion of 100,000 licsences vs. 25,000 students enrolling annually.
There maybe only 100,000 (think it is closer to 105,000 to 108,000) licensed architects but there's somewhere between 800,000 to 1,200,000 people employed directly or indirectly within the field of architecture [and development] from administrative assistants to schedulers to project managers to visualization specialists.
You are right, though, that there is a surplus of students versus open vacancies. But if you adjust for retirements and growth within the field, there's only a few thousand, not tens of thousands, surplus students to possible open positions.
Also, if you remove the anomaly that is the last 5 years of the real-estate boom of the 2000s and normalize the growth curve,the field of architecture is growing at a rate faster than general population growth.
I think the last graph I did on this shows between a 5.5-8.5% rate of growth in the field with total employment of architects to reach between 180,000-200,000 by 2020.
" all I am saying if that your pursue architecture through an academic experience that is heavily skewed towards the talents and attitudes of young people, you will have a hell of a time."
admittedly when I started architecture school, I was also working full time as a 3D environmental designer for a major Video game studio(Rockstar games) and the 11 years spent there was foundation for architcture school in that it as almost a seemless career change - Maya > Revit - school was like the video game studio I worked for and when I started working at SOM, it was an extrapolation of the two. that being said, I am not your typical example - Nicholas is serious - there is a high failure rate among older career changers that sets the stage for perceptions of those on the hiring side - discrimination exists in architecture and the employers don't make any apologies either.
@xenakis: "there is a high failure rate among older career changers that sets the stage for perceptions of those on the hiring side - discrimination exists in architecture and the employers don't make any apologies either"
It's not "discrimination" if you can't do the work.
The discrimination exists because of the high failure rate of older career changers - this creates a stereotype of perceived incompetence - many of my associates in hiring positions told me this - I just got off the phone to a recruiter that just told me the same thing. he was asking why I did not include the dates of my undergrad degree -
Great responses! It's been a roller-coaster for me to read these. Some foresee a bleak future, others seem cool and optimistic. All are helpful.
Okay, so if I've understood, it sounds like I should learn as much as I can about some prime programs - and soon. On the other hand, I will research how schools teach varying amounts of them, and how not all firms and jobs require the same amount of mastery. I'm registering tmw for AutoCAD, which seems like a good starting point for someone who has never used 3D programs. If there's a better place to start, besides Google SketchUp, then I'm all ears.
@mespellrong: If you're still reading, I wonder if you remember where you've read these figures, such as schools failing 2/3 students and interns earning $8/hour. You sound very plugged in, so I'd like to read what (and where) you read, too.
@Peter Normand: I wish I could answer you about full-time/part-time, state/private programs. Full-time is key if I'm going to catch up at all, but that means either a part-time job or a bigger loan. Location means a lot, too. That seems like a question for me to answer after more research. I don't know about resuming an art practice and teaching; hopefully, I would not need to! No doubt, it's an enormous risk!
@Nicholas: I appreciate your vision of an alternative entrance into architecture. Maybe through the next three months of research, I'll spot the lights on that runway.
The irony is that I've always looked quite young for my age; even my undergrad students are surprised on the first day of class. I could just lie on my resumé. Then again, the weathering of a M.Arch program might add many wrinkles.
hm, i almost never pulled all-nighters during university. i had kids and a wife to go home to so i just didn't get into that. it didn't affect my grades at all. the real world after graduation is more of an issue. sounds like age discrimination is quite real, based on the above. it may be more important to plan as much about what you will do after school than worry about school itself.
It's comforting to know that there are always others who ponder the same questions. At 30, I moved across the country today to begin a MArch program all the while thinking, "I'm too old for this now."
With all of the practical questions that one must concern themselves with during a career change into architecture, I think there is something to be said for and perhaps though hardly quantifiable, that a price is paid for self-doubt and the "what if" that follows you around like a shadow.
There are so many varying programs and varying costs as well. In my experience, I was looking at $100,000 difference from my first choice to second. This obviously weighs heavily in the equation and can rationalize other factors such as time, energy spent, moving in ways that you wouldn't otherwise consider.
I wish you the best of luck whichever path you take,
@Xanakis, I work at a large firm overseas (not Populous), we only use grasshopper for the design of the stadium roofs and also sometimes for seating. Everything else is in Revit and towards the end of the project we phase grasshopper out for the most part. I don't work on stadiums so can't say exactly how the process works. Think grasshopper is used just because it's more fluid / fun to use during concept design.
Sorry for derailing thread; if it's any help, off the top of my head, the older folks in my graduating class all seem to be doing well and working in the field in some sort of capacity.
Aug 22, 12 7:57 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Age 34-35 too old to begin M.Arch?
If I make the winter deadlines, I'll enroll Fall 2013 at age 34. If I don't, then it's Fall 2014 at age 35. Am I too old for this?
My undergrad degree is in classics and I have an MFA in painting. I'm an artist. My work is in shows and I teach at the college level. Despite these degrees of success, I can't make a living and anyway, my interest has shifted from art to buildings, cities, and economics.
I'm cognizant of the ideals of lifelong learning, following my heart, and using maturity as leverage. But I'm also aware that after three years of the M.Arch, I'll be 37-38 - then interning at 40 with 20-something kids. Will I be too old? If so, in what ways? How would I compensate for this?
not too old, lots of people go back to school at that age.
As everybody knows, the profession is currently in shambles, so I would weigh the reality of that before you make a 100k commitment into a field with no jobs.
If you still decide to make the leap, the age difference dosen't really matter much, in fact, I think you might be at an advantage because the 20 somethings are rather unfocused in their first professional settings anyways.
I would say added age brings added experience, understanding and added value.
Achieving high levels in your studies - and networking within the profession throughout the course will give you the best opportunities after graduation.
@mbooberalles: "Despite these degrees of success, I can't make a living ..." That would seem to be the perfect preparation for a life as an architect.
I finished the M.Arch in 2008, at the age of 47, and have had no luck finding work in the profession. I can't say for sure if age had anything to do with it, because addressing the age issue is a complete no no from an employers' standpoint. The possibility they could be sued for descrimination precludes ANY chance of this issue being discussed with them in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly.
The best answer you'll get to this is on a forum, such as here, but I wouldn't count on getting a straight answer from anyone here who would actually be in charge of hiring, it's just too controversial.
Architecture is a very slow profession, both culturally and professionally, and by professionally, I mean the two-pronged learning curve: My empirical research indicates that you'll need three years professional, i.e., in an office setting, (in today's market) of AutoDesk AutoCad, AutoDesk Revit, AutoDesk 3D Max, Adobe Creative Suite, SketchUp, Rhino, etc to even be considered for an entry level intern position. And all this on top of that M. Arch degree. And as far as I know, none of these are part of required coursework in any M.Arch program that I am aware of. (could be wrong about this) In other words, these are skills you would have to acquire on your own, in addition to your coursework.
And that is just to qualify for what's known as "production work," the entry level people who actually create the CDs (Construction Documents, in Arch lingo). After you've passed this phase, you'd (ostensibly) move into the second prong: management, which means dealing with, and eventually winning, clients. Generally speaking, production level people are not going to be given the opportunity to develop this skill set for a number of years, not when tens of thousands in fees are at stake, and could be eviscerated in seconds by the unpracticed lips of an intern, although it's not unheard of for some to just naturally possess this skill. Management personnell have often spent decades studying and learning the satraps involved in winning the tens of thousands in fees (and millions in construction costs) to "dance" at this level, because that's how long it takes.
So, I don't mean to discourage you, and maybe the economic picture will be better by the time you finish, but I thought I'd give you as accurate a picture of what it takes, albeit from my perspective. Granted, I've never spent even one hour working in an architectural office, so there's your grain of salt.
I went back to school at 35. I have completed my undergrad and am now in Masters. So I will be close to 40 when I graduate. So we are in the same boast so to speak. I can't tell you that you are too old, or that it will impact your employment opportunities as I really have no idea. But from my own experience so far I can say that when I was looking for a work term position my age was never mentioned as a negative, and in fact my 11ish years experience in the workforce was seen as a positive.
Am I worried looking for work when I graduate, of course I am. I think every student does. But firms will hire you based on your skills, experience, and personality compatibility. So make sure you get the skills that firms are looking for, work on outside projects get some experience (student competitions and the like), the personality part well thats just common sense.
At the end of the day I think going back to school was one of the best decisions for me. I couldn't imagine being 75 and having a "what if" in my life. I have always wanted to be an Architect, I am "following my heart" and my goals, and I'm not going to let a little thing like age stand in my way.
not an issue for school, maybe an issue in the reality of the workforce. there could be age discrimination, but maybe it is harder to deal with the low wages that architects start with more than anything.
as for the software, all that stuff is normally learned by doing at university. none if it is hard. knowing what to do with the software is why experience is preferred or required. in current market that is hard to come by, sadly. although to be fair, the same can be said of most any job in a big chunk of the world right now.
Age discrimination is on the increase as society becomes more social Darwinist - a Ryan and Romney win will only throw gasoline on the fire - You need to move fast before things get worse - 35 is young - hell I graduated with M.Arch at 54 and got hired by SOM that day - in 2007 - that will never happen in this climate - If I did it at 54 and I have 4 years exp. now - you can do it at 35.
I think you are too old to get into the business through traditional means (school, internship, entry level job, toiling away in a cubicle, etc...) but if you have the experience, the drive, and the knowledge (can always get that from seminars and books) you should be able to transition into the industry without re-starting your career.
What I would do is start moving your work more in the direction you want to go. Take some Architecture and Design seminars so you know how to "talk the talk", and take individual classes for things you need help in (CAD, etc).
Good luck.
Thanks for these responses so far. Really specific and helpful and I am re-reading them now.
I'm not worried about the salary. I've read that entry level interns earn mid-40s salaries. That's more than twice what I make as an adjunct lecturer and artist. But the economic forecast and job markets do worry me.
To Nicholas: why, in particular, do you think I am too old? Do you mean because of age discrimination in hiring? Or do you mean something different?
so its easier to become an architect with nothing but a pocket full of passion and a night class in cad than it is if a person goes to school and gets educated professionally with an accredited degree?
no offence to the folks who take the path lest travelled but if i were asked to choose between the two i'd be hiring the person with the professional degree and a bit of a clue...
It is hard to say when someone is too old with retirement age always being pushed back and whatnot, but it really depends what you want to do with your second career. When you consider that most people receiving the AIA "Young Architects" awards are around 40 and graduated at 25, you are looking at 15 years (if everything goes well) to advance sufficiently far that you have your own practice. You could maybe shrink that to 8-10 years since you have experience running a business. Hitting the prime of your career (about 15 years into it) when you are 65 sounds pretty unappealing to me, but to each his own.
I don't want to dissuade you from pursuing architecture, but you do not need to go to school to be successful at this.
No firms is going to want to give you IDP hours when they could spend the same investment getting a young intern the hours who will stay for many more years.
You will never compete with young interns when it comes to technology and CAD programs, parametric design, etc...
However, like I said, you have business, project management, and real world experience which are some of the most valuable assets you can have when applying to a small to mid size firm.
Don't try to go to school and get into architecture through the path that a traditional student would - you simply can't compete. Instead, exploit your life and work experience to offer something unique in the architecture market.
I think what he is trying to say is that there are other ways to be involved in the "industry" of making buildings without necessarily becoming an "architect." It is possible to be an artist and have a significant impact on some buildings or the built environment in general. Names like Olafur Eliasson and Robert Irwin immediately spring to mind. And some architects (Herzog & de Meuron amongst others) have often worked with artists too. That's not a bad approach (assuming the original poster has at least some talent as an artist).
Also, I'm inclined to doubt that the age matters so much as the temporal context. In other words, regardless of age, I think 2012 is a shitty time to become an architect (unless you got a lot of cash in the bank to finance the schooling).
Yo!
Entry level interns who find full time work in New York might make in the mid 40s. On the other hand, I've heard the going rate for a part time intern with MArch in-hand in LA or Chicago is $8 an hour. So you might want to be a bit more thorough in your analysis of current market conditions.
You should also think about how well your work ethic will fit with the ethos of design school. Most of your peers will be able to fit the mold and make up for their slacking off until the last minute by pulling multi-night all nighters at the last minute. Can your body take that stress? I went in at 28 with the assumption that I could just act like an adult and finish my work in a timely fashion, but frequently the faculty weren't prepared with assignments far enough in advance to make that possible.
You could consider just trying to find work in a firm -- many states still allow you to obtain a license with just work experience. At $8 an hour by you could finish a license in about the same time, and end up about $70k in earnings and $100K in debt you didn't have to take in front of the game.
No firms is going to want to give you IDP hours when they could spend the same investment getting a young intern the hours who will stay for many more years.
- True - 4 years experience and no IDP credit " you don't have enough runway in front of you"
"You will never compete with young interns when it comes to technology and CAD programs, parametric design, etc... "
False - I was 54 when I graduated, and I was fully up on the latest BIM technology and have been doing parametric modeling for 25 years and am able to keep up with the young turks at SOM and work all night if need be. Then again, I run 35 miles/week and am as fit as Paul Ryan
At least I am working as long as I don't have to interview with NIcholas Cecchi who believes in age discrimination -
"Don't try to go to school and get into architecture through the path that a traditional student would - you simply can't compete. Instead, exploit your life and work experience to offer something unique in the architecture market."
Again - BS - I graduated near the top of my class at 54'
you simply can't compete.
Where does this come from?
I knew I had the right idea to visit this forum. Thank you to everyone! I am reading you closely.
@mespellrong: my vision of grad design projects was similar: "I'm mature and won't set myself up for all nighters." I hadn't considered ill-prepared (or sadistic) faculty. But I'm more worried about the $8/hour intern positions you mention. How are you supposed to earn IDP hours through a part-time job?
@Nicholas: "You will never compete with young interns when it comes to technology and CAD programs, parametric design, etc..." For similar reasons as the IDP hours? Or is it an old dog/new tricks dilemma? I'm enrolling in an AutoCAD course; no way that could hurt.
@everyone on money: the art market was great from 2004-2008, but it's bad now except for the artists working at the very top. In my view.
Did any of you have older classmates during M.Arch? Did you work with older interns? If so, what's your take?
Autocad? that's old school - went from Maya to Revit instead - pick up acad on the job
learn Revit, Python,Grasshopper,Rhino and be able to also program in C# - be up on the latest social networking tools too.
"Did any of you have older classmates during M.Arch? Did you work with older interns? If so, what's your take?"
Yes, and he's running a flower shop now....
if you have been adjunct teaching, I'm sure you know exactly how well prepare faculty are capable of being. You also know it probably isn't their fault -- it is hard to be well prepared when you get a course assignment a week after the course has started, you are paid by the hour, and you are getting paid to only teach it once. I'll point out that there are many times as many full-time jobs in academia for painters in the last few years as for architects, and in most places they are on the same pay scale.
IDP says you only have to work 16 hours a week to register the hours. if you did that regularly, you would still be pretty close to the median when you finished your license seven years after graduation.
I had four classmates above 35 at the start of my program, none of them made it.
I am not saying that he CANNOT learn these things, simply that it is a much more efficient use of his time and resources to capitalize on skills he already has that will serve him well in architecture. These include Business Management, Conceptual Design, Client Interactions, managing time, money, and project resources, and the myriad things that keep projects and offices moving forward.
As far as "not being able to compete" the truth in the vast majority of cases is that if you are not born into a wealthy family, you will not have the same opportunities as your M.Arch classmates. They will be taking unpaid internships with prestigious firms, attending additional design and CAD seminars out of pocket, buying $10,000 programs, do not have to work during school, etc, etc... I based my comments on the assumption you will need to keep some semblance of a life running while you are in school and shortly after.
Xenakis - You may not be representative of the population in that someone with a tech history and exceptional drive will be highly motivated to learn CAD programs, whereas the original poster does not seem to be that type of person. If the ultimate goal is to get to a position where he is designing buildings, knowing CAD is only one of many possible intermediate steps. I am not going to get into a debate on the value of knowing how to operate design tools (am a big proponent of this), but just because the archinect community is big on emerging digital technologies does not mean that every firm will be.
You seem to be an exception to the rule as most non-traditional students I went to school with did not even make it through. The one that did is a waiter.
Please do not take my comments as ageist or discriminatory, I am simply being honest in the spirit of an open and frank discourse.
Nicholas - Your comments are welcome - the only problem I have is IDP - seems like the whole architecture community is in lock step about not wanting to sign off on 4 years of my experience - they say "what are going to use it for? - you don't have enough runway" After 4 years of struggle, I have had to fight my way to stay afloat - the recession and all it's unfairness has only increased my will and I will never give up.
I was always most impressed with the architects who are not actually licensed, but hire a licensed architect to sign off on their ideas. Like they are just way too busy being incredible designers to even think about wasting time getting a license.
Perhaps you (xenakis) are focusing only on licensure when you could explore other options for getting where you want to be. This is the same thing I am suggesting the op investigate.
Open and frank discourse is preferable; this is my life! I do not have a tech history. I've learned Photoshop because I use it regularly, but I've never needed anything beyond that. Moreover, I'm a painter, and most painters, in my view, are not "project-oriented." It's possible that I'm a worse-case scenario in Nicholas' forecast. None of this discussion makes up my mind for me, but it gives me new dimensions to consider.
mbooberalles -- I am the principal in our firm responsible for all hiring. Over the years, we've received credentials from a number of candidates who switched to architecture after taking a different initial degree and then working in another discipline for a few years. All else being equal, I've always wanted to meet these candidates because they can bring a maturity, discipline and degree of seasoning to the work place. Typically, they also know EXACTLY why they want to work in architecture, unlike some younger grads, who still may be trying on architecture to see how it fits.
The primary challenge is ALWAYS compensation. Again, all else being equal, we cannot pay much, if any premium, for an older candidate right out of school -- you won't receive much, if any, credit for your work experience in other areas of your life. If that's a big problem for you, I would not go this direction.
While your starting pay is likely to be comparable to any other recent grad with comparable skills and portfolio, I will say that the older candidates we've hired in the past have progressed somewhat faster than their younger colleagues. I attribute this to the characteristics I outline in my first paragraph above. But, you can't expect to substitute "maturity" for "capability" -- at the end of the day, you must compete with your younger colleagues on the basis of contribution. If you cant' do that, it will be hard to make a case to bring you on board, or keep you on board.
This is perhaps a harsh assessment, but it is one based on personal experience. We've had some wonderful staff members who came to us while starting a second phase of their career and some of those have been very, very successful. But, it's always a challenge -- both for the individual and for the firm.
I don't know - I spent over 50 years with rose colored glasses on or am oblivious to negative realities some say I don't have any common sense - my younger sister is retired and spends her time swimming across the Golden Gate - people call her a fool too "don't you know the sharks will eat you or a container ship will run you over"- must be the genes. inregards to both my sister and I we both find out what it takes and do it - you can't just try - try is the road to failure - What ever choice you make - don't try - just do it
@quizzical: Thank you! Hearing about maturity vs. capability does resonate. And thank you on behalf of a potential future version of me, who would be an older applicant looking for employers with open minds.
Aside from my age, software is my weakest point. I am very good at perspective and drafting by hand, but that might seem quaint in many firms. I never needed to learn Revit, Rhino, CAD, etc. Sounds like I should get started immediately if I want to compete. Even if I don't end up pursuing an M.Arch, those tools might be useful in other ways.
It seems like M.Arch admission (or rejection) might be telling. Would an M.Arch program really admit someone who is too old (or unskilled) to compete in the job market? Schools need alumni to succeed.
The evidence is that schools do not need those they admit to succeed. Most fail out two out of three they admit, and of the grads, not many pass the exams. Just consider the proportion of 100,000 licsences vs. 25,000 students enrolling annually.
Too old is not a huge problem the main question is can you afford a mistake and a start over, if you leave art and teaching behind for a while could you pick it up again? Do you have plans for state or private? Full time or part time?
school hours are not hard, wouldn't worry about it. real world is a lot harder than school can ever be.
wouldn't sweat CAD either. It's not that hard to pick up ACAD and once you have that (or similar) the rest of the software becomes easier. not sure about learning C+. some of my students make programs and work with grasshopper and rhino and so on, but i still don't see them doing anything with those skills after graduation. the guys i see doing more on programming side in profession are the urban planning types. at least for now.
perspective by hand is not likely to come up unless you go to ye oldey timey university. i suppose you will have an advantage with photoshopping and presentations, which is not bad thing to have as skill goes.
as for universities they do not care if you can get a job, same as art school, really.
Will, the large firms that do stadium design will have a team of grasshopper folks, but it doesn't seem that they actually get much past the basic functionality of grasshopper (scripting even in that situation has limited use).
However, we have been playing around w/ Revit plug-ins as of late to to get some xtra functionality out of Revit. Not much new scripting going on but more tweaking a few things from something off the web to get better results. That being said, the amount of time spent on this stuff in almost every firm is miniscule compared to how much effort people put into it in school.
If you are going to get into it, I recommend Python over C+.
And yeah, my most succesful quarters in school were when I was holding down a part-time job in my last year. You just have to get the hang of time-management. First year was tough for me though, people's milage will vary. Also, one the best Revit guys at my firm is in his 50s; he can keep up / pass the best of us.
I think it's ok to go for the march as long as you can keep your debt down. If you are prepared to go overseas, there are opportunities and money to be made.
intheloop
Grasshopper for stadiums? I was working partime for an office on the 49er stadium in Santa Clara and all of it is in Revit - the pime architect HNTB, did 49er stadium and memorial stadium in Berkeley in Revit. I can see how grasshopper could solve a lot of design issues though. Do you work for HOK-sport?
I do not think you are a "worst-case scenario." I actually think you are in a great position to switch to architecture. I don't mean to be coming of as negative on this whole idea - all I am saying if that your pursue architecture through an academic experience that is heavily skewed towards the talents and attitudes of young people, you will have a hell of a time.
You obviously have alot of strengths currently, so use those instead of embarking on something you have no experience with.
Your maturity and outside experience would be enough of a reason for me to hire you alone.
Just consider the proportion of 100,000 licsences vs. 25,000 students enrolling annually.
There maybe only 100,000 (think it is closer to 105,000 to 108,000) licensed architects but there's somewhere between 800,000 to 1,200,000 people employed directly or indirectly within the field of architecture [and development] from administrative assistants to schedulers to project managers to visualization specialists.
You are right, though, that there is a surplus of students versus open vacancies. But if you adjust for retirements and growth within the field, there's only a few thousand, not tens of thousands, surplus students to possible open positions.
Also, if you remove the anomaly that is the last 5 years of the real-estate boom of the 2000s and normalize the growth curve,the field of architecture is growing at a rate faster than general population growth.
I think the last graph I did on this shows between a 5.5-8.5% rate of growth in the field with total employment of architects to reach between 180,000-200,000 by 2020.
" all I am saying if that your pursue architecture through an academic experience that is heavily skewed towards the talents and attitudes of young people, you will have a hell of a time."
admittedly when I started architecture school, I was also working full time as a 3D environmental designer for a major Video game studio(Rockstar games) and the 11 years spent there was foundation for architcture school in that it as almost a seemless career change - Maya > Revit - school was like the video game studio I worked for and when I started working at SOM, it was an extrapolation of the two. that being said, I am not your typical example - Nicholas is serious - there is a high failure rate among older career changers that sets the stage for perceptions of those on the hiring side - discrimination exists in architecture and the employers don't make any apologies either.
-
@xenakis: "there is a high failure rate among older career changers that sets the stage for perceptions of those on the hiring side - discrimination exists in architecture and the employers don't make any apologies either"
It's not "discrimination" if you can't do the work.
The discrimination exists because of the high failure rate of older career changers - this creates a stereotype of perceived incompetence - many of my associates in hiring positions told me this - I just got off the phone to a recruiter that just told me the same thing. he was asking why I did not include the dates of my undergrad degree -
Great responses! It's been a roller-coaster for me to read these. Some foresee a bleak future, others seem cool and optimistic. All are helpful.
Okay, so if I've understood, it sounds like I should learn as much as I can about some prime programs - and soon. On the other hand, I will research how schools teach varying amounts of them, and how not all firms and jobs require the same amount of mastery. I'm registering tmw for AutoCAD, which seems like a good starting point for someone who has never used 3D programs. If there's a better place to start, besides Google SketchUp, then I'm all ears.
@mespellrong: If you're still reading, I wonder if you remember where you've read these figures, such as schools failing 2/3 students and interns earning $8/hour. You sound very plugged in, so I'd like to read what (and where) you read, too.
@Peter Normand: I wish I could answer you about full-time/part-time, state/private programs. Full-time is key if I'm going to catch up at all, but that means either a part-time job or a bigger loan. Location means a lot, too. That seems like a question for me to answer after more research. I don't know about resuming an art practice and teaching; hopefully, I would not need to! No doubt, it's an enormous risk!
@Nicholas: I appreciate your vision of an alternative entrance into architecture. Maybe through the next three months of research, I'll spot the lights on that runway.
The irony is that I've always looked quite young for my age; even my undergrad students are surprised on the first day of class. I could just lie on my resumé. Then again, the weathering of a M.Arch program might add many wrinkles.
"Then again, the weathering of a M.Arch program might add many wrinkles".
after 2 years of 4 hrs/night sleep, I switched to Revit - do yourself a favor and learn it
after learning Revit, I slept 8 hour/night while my classmates pulled all nighters
hm, i almost never pulled all-nighters during university. i had kids and a wife to go home to so i just didn't get into that. it didn't affect my grades at all. the real world after graduation is more of an issue. sounds like age discrimination is quite real, based on the above. it may be more important to plan as much about what you will do after school than worry about school itself.
It's comforting to know that there are always others who ponder the same questions. At 30, I moved across the country today to begin a MArch program all the while thinking, "I'm too old for this now."
With all of the practical questions that one must concern themselves with during a career change into architecture, I think there is something to be said for and perhaps though hardly quantifiable, that a price is paid for self-doubt and the "what if" that follows you around like a shadow.
There are so many varying programs and varying costs as well. In my experience, I was looking at $100,000 difference from my first choice to second. This obviously weighs heavily in the equation and can rationalize other factors such as time, energy spent, moving in ways that you wouldn't otherwise consider.
I wish you the best of luck whichever path you take,
@Xanakis, I work at a large firm overseas (not Populous), we only use grasshopper for the design of the stadium roofs and also sometimes for seating. Everything else is in Revit and towards the end of the project we phase grasshopper out for the most part. I don't work on stadiums so can't say exactly how the process works. Think grasshopper is used just because it's more fluid / fun to use during concept design.
Sorry for derailing thread; if it's any help, off the top of my head, the older folks in my graduating class all seem to be doing well and working in the field in some sort of capacity.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.