i doubt most architecture schools will put the GPA on the top of their priority list.... inside the US or out

the issue of gpa i don't know about...probably not as big an issue if your portfolio i good...

but the issue of working in the usa...2 years is probably not long enough. after you finish grad school or pro degree you will need to log enough hours to take exams. most of my friends still in north america spent 3 years on former and 2 on latter. i believe that is about average, though could be wrong. some of my former classmates are still working on exams some 8 years after graduating...

i believe you will only be able to use a limited amount of experience from outside north america towards licencing reqs.

I studied quite a bit for the GRE and did very well on it. My GPA was also good - but I got rejected from 3 of the 4 schools that applied too. Granted the schools that I got rejected from were very competitive. To me this would indicate that for M.Arch Programs it's mostly about your portfolio and maybe your essay to a lesser extent.

I see... so whats important is...

1. portfolio
2. portfolio
3. portfolio

served as a student member on the admissions committee my last year at a canadian school and can confirm at that time (8 yrs ago) that portfolio was by far the most important criterion there.

as for licensing in US, three years of work is required as a minimum. some people do it faster by doing overtime, but most people i know take at least a year longer. i started doing the canadian equivalent which is modelled on the US system (same exams) and have been working outside the country most of the time in US and asia.

paperwork and submission criteria have been so onerous that i have pretty much given up on ever getting registered. would rather do what i do on my own terms than have a title and be saddled with the liability issues anyways (rationalizing yes, but mostly true)

if you are out working for a few years, GPA ain't so imprtant. fresh outta school and green, it definitely does.

If your undergraduate GPA is "very low" it obviously means that you did not succeed at that level. Your GPA is a huge indicator in how well you succeed in school so if you were unsuccessful at that level than why should YOU or a prospective "TOP" graduate school think that you have a chance at succeeding in that level?

I'm not trying to discourage you at all, but if you didn't succeed at the undergraduate level don't try to kid yourself into believing that you deserve to be at a top graduate school.

It's like someone trying to apply for a position at Morphosis, Herzog and de meuron, Polshek and Partners, and Rafael Vinoly just because they like their work but are woefully unqualified and lacking in ability and experience.

archmed,

grades aren't indicative of how well you succeeded in school.

i know a number of transfer students that came in w/ high marks, and then got a lot of Bs and Cs taking upper level classes (outside of studio). they didn't have the english 101s and calculus for dummies to pad their grades. but they ended up going on to some of the better known firms in the country.

getting a lot of Cs in studio and in major courses would be another matter.

Holz, if a person has a bad overall GPA like from a 2.0-2.5, it would be because they didn't succeed overall both within their concentration and beyond. I agree that portfolios are the strongest asset in the admissions process, but having such a low undergrad GPA like the one mentioned above does indeed raise some eyebrows.

I don't want you to get me wrong, I had a less-than stellar overall GPA back when I was applying for grad school (made up for it with a good portfolio and solid GREs) but I wasn't jaded into believing that I belonged in ivy league school just because it was an ivy league school.

(Although VT has made quite a name for itself)

i'll agree about aiming for ivy schools with a low gpa...

but success is subjective.

success as you define it - a 3.8 or 4.0 perhaps, is different than say the first person in a family to graduate college, albeit they may only get a 2.4 (though that usually isn't the case)

i've an aunt that teaches at stanford, where grade inflation is rampant. this also degrades the GPA process. also, many of her top students routinely get less than stellar grades, but these people are also heads of campus orgs, taking on extremely large loads and sometimes working jobs.

frankly, everything should only be pass/fail, and then you'd have to get into grad programs on merit (portfolio, letters of rec, interview. resume, etc.) these are more indicative of how strong a candidate the applicant is. having a 4.0 taking piddly classes is all fine and dandy, but really could mean the applicant can do busy work all day long.

on second thought, that might be ideal for architecture. i've spent days trying to move CA paperwork off my desk...

yup i understand, i am not trying to get into somewhere i dont belong and thinking i am that good...i just want to learn

however, i am having a bad gpa is the truth now,, and obviously there is nothing i can do about it...so my only last shot is to work super hard in portfolio and GRE

sound good?

And I'm not really directing this towards you only, Gyo, but to many people out there who are reading all of this.

We get a lot of people who come on here and tell us of their slightly-above-abysmal undergraduate academic standings yet talk as if Harvard GSD, the AA, Yale, and Columbia are virtually camped out at their doorsteps waiting for their "golden" application.

People should understand what they are up against.

umm... sound like i am basically fuked ..cuz of my bad academic standings....

so sad....sigh...

You'll be alright.

But if you think that you are fucked only because the GSD won't accept your 2.3 GPA even though you can go to many other graduate schools, that's your own problem.

Jusy take your GREs, do a decent portfolio, and apply to a lot of different schools.

RANDOM Example in no order whatsoever:

Yale
Maryland
Ohio State
Clemson
Texas-Arlington
U of Oregon
Miami-Ohio
Illinois-Chicago
Syracuse
NC State

I think this is a very hearty mix of schools that each have very decent and unique programs.

GYO-

I'm trying to get into a grad school with a 2.39 undergrad gpa. I understand your doubt completely. However, per whats been said, I'm focusing completely on portfolio and GREs to raise the bar for me. I am not going to waste my time applying to ivies. But i'm not going to grad school to acquire that level of status and class work anyway. I just want to study architecture and have the option to be registered one day.


do you have a grad prep program available in your area? thats the route i'm taking to produce a solid portfolio. Plus, i've spent the last year taking interior design classes at UCLA ext with almost all As to have something more recent to show with good grades. I haven't figured out what i'm gonna do about prepping for the GRe yet, but that'll be a lot of work as well.

good luck!