I wasn't aware Michigan offered a Master of Landscape Architecture as a stand-alone degree. I had always thought it was offered as a dual along side an urban + regional planning degree.

Here's information about their MLA degree:
http://www.snre.umich.edu/degree_programs/landscape_architecture_3yr.php

I guess I never realized because it isn't offered through the TCAUP.

any degree is worth what you make of it. architecture at U of M is well regarded, so I can imagine that the landscape program is pretty good.

the big question to ask, is do you plan on staying within 200 miles of where you grew up for the rest of your life? or do you want to experience the bigger world? I'd strongly recommend going to school beyond your comfort zone and get a radically new experience.

the tuition/fees will be similar (though MI is slightly more), but cost of living in berkeley is much highter (but better coffee). You can't beat the practitioners teaching at UC. U of MI is slightly off the beaten trail of the starchiscapers...

The MLA program is completely outside the UM Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning. The two programs sadly have virtually no interaction with each other. The MLA program has a beautiful LEED-certified renovated building on Central Campus; TCAUP is in a modern buidling on North Campus, three miles away. While I received my degree from TCAUP, I had a friend in landscape. From what I remember the program is very much into sustainable design. (This was back in '99.)

Since most people on this forum tend to be architects, it may be hard to get a straight read on the MLA program at Michigan, and there may be some confusion about the two programs. Be warned.

Above post made with apologizes to the landscape architects among us. There are probably more LAs in these forums than I realize.

I only know of a couple, jafidler. There may be some lurkers, but as far as active members, a handfull at best.

It's true, I'm not sure U-M is on the radar as much as Berkeley. Most job opportunities are on the coasts, so you might get pulled out to SF anyway when youre looking for work. At U-M, being a part of the school of natural resources seems like it would be a great advantage, but the physical disconnect from the architecture school sounds awful. North campus and central campus have this geographic and psychological divide in an otherwise walkable campus ... especially in the bitter cold.

This is great info so far. I did go to UM for undergrad for natural resources, which would mean going *back* to the same school.

To provide more context: I also got waitlisted at Penn...I attended their open house on Monday and was impressed with their curriculum. It seems to be a very different program from Berkeley, on top of the geographic differences. The main factor that is leaving Michigan on the table is that my partner also got into Michigan Law. Not sure if going to Michigan's MLA program would give me the same boost and opportunities as Berkeley or Penn...which prompted the original question about whether Michigan's program would give me adequate preparation and standing for the field.

Hey mlinz -

another waitlisted mla student at Penn here. Could you please tell me more about the open house. What was your sense of the MLA program? Any word on the likelihood of getting in off the waitlist?

If you got into Penn do you think you would choose that over Michigan or Berkeley? Please let me know your thoughts about Penn after attending the open house.

I think the program at Michigan would be very different than the other two you mentioned. I think it depends on where you want to take you career - Michigan def. seems way more focused on natural resources planning etc. than either of the other schools. If you want to diversify your skills the other programs might be a better fit, but if you want to specialize then sticking with Michigan could be a great fit.

I doubt that a Wolverine would want to jump ship and become a Spartain, Buckeye, or a (insert Ball State Masscot here).

ball state has an excellent program. however, you would have to reside in muncie.

DCI:

The Penn Open House was very helpful for me. The dean introduced each department, then we split off into our programs. Jim Corner introduced the faculty and the MLA curriculum, then he field questions from us for about 30 minutes. The presentation got me excited about the curriculum, especially the level of sophistication of visuals and mapping. All of the studios were based in brownfield/urban sites, which was very appealing to me because I am interested in sustainable development, restoration/reclamation issues. We had a very brief and hurried tour of the building by current students, which was slightly disappointing because I wished the guides had more time. But I felt better about that because more students were available to chat during the lunch. I didn't get to sit with any faculty members, unfortunately. During the afternoon, there was a financial aid session, a diversity roundtable and a dual-degree roundtable. The day capped off with happy hour in front of the building (very much appreciated by me!).

I approached Mr. Corner about the waitlist and he was pretty direct, though I wish I had more time to talk to him. I do understand that he had to choose between convincing admitted students to accept and a potential wait lister.

Hope that helps..Any specifics you'd like to know?

mlinz et al - If you have other Penn questions, Heather and I are the known LARPies floating around archinect.

I approached Mr. Corner about the waitlist and he was pretty direct

What does that mean? What did he say?

How did the students seem to enjoy the program? What were the pros and cons that they talked about?

Thanks so much for that information about the open house. I visited the school in December, but only met with one student so any additional info is great!

yes, what j said. i'm not sure the umich mla is that highly regarded actually. not that it is a bad thing, but it is definitely not design-based. it is a part of the school of natural resources. they aren't designers; it is a very technical program. this might be a good thing of course if you already have a design background.

treekiller: thanks for offering your insights. i have been reading many of your entries throughout the forum and the comments you've made about penn's program. ;)

dci: essentially, jim said that my portfolio needed improvement. i figure i have to get use to direct feedback if i'm going to be an MLA student..still, it was a bit disappointing because i do not have a formal design or art background (i studies natural resources for undergrad).

hey if anybody calls you a viola tricolor hortensis, they are disrespectin you!!!

I just went through the whole process of reasearching and applying to MLA programs - I just got back from a visit and decided I'm going to be attending UC Berkeley in the fall. They seemed to offer great research opportunities and their proximity to the urban planning department, which is also one of the best in the country was one of the main reasons I decided to attend.

I looked at U. Mich. also, but I have a friend who did her M. Arch. there and she said it was really more tied to theenvironmental sciences department - very technically based.

Another school I was looking at was LSU - I had a huge bias against it but once I went there it made my decision a lot harder - their student and faculty work is really beautiful. But they told me they concentrate mostly on representation and design and are getting more into digital work. Since I already have a studio background, it wasn't really for me, but for someone new to the design profession, (I'm just guessing since you mentioned the 3-yr. program) I think it's a really strong program.

Hello (am I a lurker?)

I apologize for resurrecting a four month old thread but I thought I'd chime in on this discussion since I'm currently an MLA at Umich.

The MLA program is a three year accredited program housed in the School of Natural Resources and the Environment. Each class is on average 15 students.

The focus of the program is certainly science-based design, with particular focus on landscape ecology, ecosystem restoration, sustainable design, and alternative futures. That being said, the program really does divide itself fairly evenly between science/technical fields and the design arts. I have a gut feeling that many other programs teach aspects of sustainable design without fully digging into the ecological underpinnings of those decisions. That’s certainly been my observation of some of the LA profession (based on attending ASLA events).

There have been a significant number of changes to the school of natural resources in the past few years, and by extension the Landscape Architecture program. We have two new faculty that came on in the winter 2006 term, another starting this fall. Our position in a natural resources school is unusual, and sometimes difficult, but few of us would be willing to trade that.

That being said, some of the MLA’s do take studio courses on north campus with the architects and urban planners, which is certainly encouraged. We also get a modest showing of urban planners coming down to take our GIS analytics courses, so there is slowly getting to be more crossover between the programs, and we’re trying to build some stronger relationships in that regard.

Anyway, please feel free to ask other burning questions . . .

Cheers.

OK- you're 4 posts away from having been a lurker. Thanks for making the leap into active archinecture and reprezenting UMich.

(ps- never apologize for *bumping* a thread)

good luck with finishing the mla.

well thank you!

I've got my lazy eye on the look out for other LA's.

I'm considering both an MArch and an MLA at this point, and am still unsure which one I want to do.

I've had internships at an Architecture firm (SANAA) and I did Career Discovery at the GSD last summer in Landscape architecture.

It was soooo frustrating to hear everyone just talking about design because the main pull to the architecture is the green design/sustainability schtick. Hearing that the UMich school is connected to the natural resources department is very very attractive to me.

Are there any other schools that have a similar relationship or our more science/less design focused?

Would it be possible to have a force a more science focused degree in a a formalist school like the GSD?

Im a landscape architect and also responsible for hiring in our studio.

I can tell you from our studios perspective the school doesn't really matter. When we get gsd, Berkeley and Penn applicants we kind of have a brief ooohh moment but that wears off fast. It's all about what can you do  and what kind of person are you.

We value passion first and foremost. If you are passionate about this profession you will be successful no matter what school you go to. Different schools will however open doors. Larger corporate firms tend to care more and reward academic experience.

For the record I don't have a degree.