UIC has recently instituted a very rigorous and thorough design studio sequence in the undergrad years and it has reaped very positive results so far. I would guess that in the interest of keeping the studios strong (and your experience in the school strong) they are acting in favor of bringing you in through their system rather than as an unintegrated odd-man-out lateral transfer. There's something to be said for this idea. Also, they are really focusing on making the program stronger and more stringent and it could be that they are pushing up the bar on the transfer student portfolios to maintain this as well. My guess is that, if you can afford the extra year, being a more integrated part of this studio sequence could reap positive rewards for you as well. What school are you transferring from?

well, i think the difference in the degree is a big deal.

the 5 yr. B.Arch

or the 4 yr. B.S.

Really, it's going to take you 3 years to graduate with either cause of where UIC placed you. I think you may want to think about your plans for Grad School. If you want to go to Grad school in the states, I think you take UIC. You've alluded to the fact that maybe you want to move to better program for grad school. I think UIC would be more appropriate. IIT is probably a better choice if you don't want to do grad school or are planning on going to grad school overseas and return to practice in the states. You are able to get licensed with the B.Arch not with the B.S.

^Postal - you can still get licensed in Illinois with the BS until 2014

ok, but you'll have to do an additional 410 tu's for IDP...

hmm, i guess that's sorta a wash, with putting in the extra time for an MArch. Strange, i didn't know that, i guess i was only concerned with my ass when I did all my research a long time ago. I guess some of what i typed is still applicable. thanks ep.

Well they dont tell anyone this - in fact at UIC the profesors straight up lied to me about the BS and licensure, I actually called the State of Illinois to find out the truth. Now it could be a problem with reciprocity in the future with some states, but after enough years of licensure it should work out.

It's interesting because here in Illinois, the community colleges are supposed to be able to feed into the state college system. UUIC, the school in Champagne, accepts transfer students into the 3rd year of the 4 year program whereas UIC only allows them into 2nd year. Further, UIC tries to push the community college transfer crowd into a summer studio before they take 2nd year. Many students spend 2 or 3 years at a community college and they face spending 6 years or more getting a 4 year degree. That reflects larger trends as well. I would get out asap and spend as little money as possible. If you've taken the studios at the community college level, I would make sure you have some good work to show them and get yourself at a minimum into 2nd year without the summer studio.


Remember that Glenn Murcutt went to Sydney Technical College and became a Pritzker Prize Recipient. You can learn a great deal anywhere if you work hard and have the right attitude.

UIC Undergrads (and grads) are a good bunch and makeup for alot of the work being done in this city right now.

Thanks for the help. It's just a bit frustrating considering the community college i'm coming from (College of DuPage) has articulation agreements with IIT/UIUC/Judson for third year placement but not UIC.

I don't think getting placed as a 2nd year is so bad anyways- there's a whole lot more I can learn and improve on, plus I wanted to do the Barcelona Studio and that gives me about a year to prepare for it.

Oh, and about fighting it- If I fight it I can pretty easily get waived out of the first semester design course, but if i'm going to be there for the whole second year, i'd rather just take both the first and second semester courses.

That or maybe spend the first semester taking some other courses in urban planning or art and doing some competitions on the side.

What's the program like at the College of Dupage?

What were your studio projects like?

I'd like to see what you did.

make - UIC had a bridge program where comunity college students came in as 3 year after a summer session. I remember the proffesors at the time I was there didnt particularily like the bridge program. I think they saw it as cheating. It sounds like they got their way.

Evil,

Now it's the 2nd semester. I know because I involved in this stuff.

That's why Champaign is a better deal.

I meant to say 2nd year.

Champaign is generally a more serious academic environment - its pretty tuff school. UIC is generally easy to get into, most students forign born or 2nd generation which makes it, I think, one of the most interesting schools in the country.

Glenn Murcett went to the University of New South Wales and got a regular 5-year architecture degree. that was in 1961. he is hardly an example of someone becoming an architect only by means of hard work and the right attitude.

This is interesting I go to the same school as mpecirno. I was accepted to IIT, UIC, and UIUC. I would like to hear some of your thoughts on these schools. Right now I am indifferent with all these schools. Its so frustrating to look at each school and see whats more worth while to go to. So advice would be greatly appreciated.

but murcutt did fail sunlight and shade his first time around...

"And then Murcutt took light and shadow again and figured it out."

He is really amazing. The laser-like focus exists both in his personal life and in his work. He went to a good school, IIT, UIC and UUIC are all good schools. Can you graduate in 2 years from UUIC and get licensed with that degree? It would save you time and money. This would free you up to go intern for in Europe or build houses for Habitat for Humanity.

If you've had a decent studio at the College of Dupage, then 2 more years of studio at UUIC are plenty, move on and get a job. Real education begins when you've left school and you have a real client, site, budget,etc. and desire to do something creative.

Yes - I hear MakeArch is hiring to;)

Evil,

My first hire will be an Intern Coordinator.

This is what it was it was like when I was in intern:



The only difference is that we have computers now ;-)

I went through 2 years of UIC undergrad studio and compared to the school im at right now (cal poly pomona) I am very unimpressed with their program (UIC). However that was 3 years ago and they have undrgone some substantial changes. The biggest problem I had at that time was their constant reference to IIT example " Well IIT is doing this this week so we will too" (seriously no joke). But I did have some very good teachers there Petco who teaches with a no BS style and really gives you a breakdown of architecture in the real world and how it really works. And Jason Pickelman who is actually a graphic designer but works with SOM on facade design. Those were the 2 best proffesors in the undergrad program as far as im concerned.
If you are going for your March eventually UIC may be a better choice because you will save $40,000 in tuition.

If you list Petko as one of the better professors you had at UIC, you definitely got shafted in your studio selections.

As for the IIT references, the school 3 years ago (as I was making my exit) was a bit lacking in a clear identity, probably due to the revolving door at dean the previous few years and Friedman's lack of identity in and of himself. That being said, I never ever encountered any mimicry of IIT's exercises or approaches while I was there (umm... with the notable exception of anything taught by Lou Rocah, who frankly, is so freakin' awesome he's above criticism).


.mm

UIC is a public university with no direction - it will always be a heavan for want-to- be acedemic types to bolster their resumes and move on to better posts while mantaining a legacy of failed thought experiments and ruined curriculum. That said, its prob not much different than any other public inst where theres no accountability - just scumbag proffesors living off the government's tit. Then the other half are hard working, aactual architects who practice in the real world and will tell it how it is. Theres only 2 reasons to go to UIC - Location in downtown Chicago gives you access to great jobs and internships while in school. The second - $- it may be the most affordable program in the country.

MMatt
its true the faculty I was exposed to was mostly temporary or right out of school faculty. Perhaps I think that about Petko b/c he was the only licensed architect that I had as a prof there???

What about Gelick, Cohen, Concepcione' ? Arent they still there?

I think Concepcion is at a community college. Cohen does eccentric McMansions up on Sherman in Evanston with his wife and moonlights as Director at the Art Institute. Who's Gelick?

Is Concepcion still practicing?

Wm

Carlos Concecione )sp?) was a professor from Spain - had his own practice there. He was in his 40's back in the mid 90's. One of the best teachers I ever had. It was all about the building, not process, not curriculum - just straight up architecture for architecture's sake.

Cohen gets a bum rap for his high end north shore residential but if you had him for studio - the guy can do modern better than a lot of folks - its just his market is what its become, we cant slight him for it

Thanks make - I didnt know he was with a local firm here

go tech hawks

kakaw, kakaw!

I am teasing about Cohen, he is more interesting than the North Shore stuff he does to pay his bills.

Concepcion has done some really interesting work in Chicago. He is a bit below the radar. Can you tell us more about his class at UIC?

Does anyone know if Concepcion did this project on Rockwell and George? I'll try to find a photo of it...

You can find out who is teaching at UIC and IIT by going to these websites.

http://www.arch.uic.edu/faculty.php

http://www.iit.edu/arch/faculty/

Given, that I hear J Gang doesnt really teach at IIT and is just on payroll to make the school faculty roster look good, and Martin Felsen will be teaching at Archeworks next semester and in the same situation, I dont really think IIT has all that much to offer anyone other than warmed over modernism, poorly done dutch interpretism, and bad corporate design studios, led by bad SOM partners.

My two cents from observation. (I haven't attended either schools)

I would argue that there are good teachers at these schools and they aren't the Archinect fanboys and fangirls. Concepcion is an example of a good architect and teacher that hasn't made the fanboy list.

what about UIUC any thoughts on this school?

i really wish i knew what IIT has done to make so many random people bitter and angry... did IIT kill your parents? did an IIT student have sex with you significant others? good god people, if you dont have an intimate knowledge of a program i dont understand why you would comment at all. evil and make are off the hook. hotsies... im dissapointed in you

I had Juan Rois as a studio professor when he was at Michigan, he's a good instructor.

http://www.arch.uic.edu/faculty/rois.php

Illini-

I actually said nothing negative about IIT in this thread.


I only made the point that celebrity status does not equate with teaching excellence.

And there are actually some really good architects in Chicago who are not fanboys and fangirls on Archinect.

That's all

One theme I see again and again on Archinect is that only a Starchitect can be a good teacher. Architecture is not about Unity, Dialogue, Volume, Expression, etc. but, rather, about getting close to a personality that will impart wisdom on you and make you a Starchitect.

Especially telling was the response to my comment about Murcutt getting where is today with laser-like focus and hard work. He became the architect he is today doing a beautiful job of making the ordinary extraordinary. He took unsexy stuff about solar angles, saving water and natural ventilation and make it beautiful. Sure he brings great talent to the table but he didn't go to an Ivy League school or worship anyone. He really hard to get where he is today.

There are good teachers at all of the schools that have been mentioned here. How the schools fit with you and what you're looking for is another question.

so if you had a choice to study with Murcutt or a good "no-name" teacher, you'd take the "no-name" teacher. based on your logic, you wouldn't want to just follow someone or worship them.

but then again, as you say, he does a beautiful job of making the ordinary extraordinary, so why wouldn't you - if given a choice - be interested to work with someone you consider special??

good teachers are good teachers and bad teachers are bad teachers - whether they are well known or not, whether they are humble or not.

dlb,

I agree with your last statement but what I read on here is that ONLY the starchitects are the good teachers. It assumes that something with interesting work is therefore an interesting teacher.

Who do you think taught Murcutt at New South Wales? Or Gehry at USC?

There were good people there that didn't have big names. They're the ones who teach every studio rather than being there two or three times in the semester.

But again, there's a naive bunch here that assumes celebrity status in Architecture makes someone a great teacher. They dismiss schools because so and so isn't there anymore.

Look at the house (see above) by Concepcion. He isn't well-known on the Archinect boards, but he does good work.

Good work. That's what I am after.

For the record UIC's undergrad program (& faculty) has been significantly overhauled within the last 3 years and seems much stronger and to have better identity. The professors I know there are some of the leading practitioners in Chicago -- Dan Wheeler, Richard Blender come to mind--Deborah Fausch is great... also their lecture series this past year has been by FAR the best in the city. So personally I would caution you to take comments from anything further back than 3 years ago with a big grain of salt. It seems to me that it's almost like a new school nowadays. That's all... I know nothing at all about IIT...

Who is Deborah Fausch?

i don't really know much about uic... however, i know that bob somol is the new director of the architecture program at uic... that can only be a good thing... although it may take a few years to get the program whipped into shape...

The program is the same as it ever was only the attitudes and make up of the faculty have changed. The addition of Murcutt is like a validation of the early Chicago Postmodernism Philosophy of interventions with structure, articulated and dynamic skin, a techtonic asthetic - all early postmodern divergence from the religious dogma of the stric modernis box that the school has focused on - wether or not intentionally I do not know, but certainly having members of the faculty part of the Chicago 7 helps. I think this same period of the mid 1970's produced some of the best Chicago work since Mies. Helmut Jahn's early libraries come to mind. This was PoMo before allegory and the literati crowd hijacked it, this was the PoMo you could take to the bank. This methodolgy is the true PoMo birthmother and great bastard stepchild of the expresionists.
JK - calss of '92

, and Deborah Fausch.

So she wrote this book? OK. What else?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0966084004/sr=1-6/qid=1209238392/ref=olp_tab_used?ie=UTF8&coliid=&me=&qid=1209238392&sr=1-6&seller=&colid=&condition=used

But my book is running $175 a copy. I think I have a few lying around if there are any takers. ;-)

well, you asked who she was and I answered. what else is that she's a good teacher. she does interesting research, is active in the city, and is a good teacher. mentioned in my list of good teachers at UIC. do you need anything more?

What does she teach?

Physics?

FAshion?

Studio?

What did you do in her studio?

She is currently teaching studio. The three teachers I happened to mention that happened to come to mind are all studio teachers who I've seen to have good work coming out of their studios. I know very little about the program beyond what I've seen of the students work and what I've seen in interactions with some of the professors, as I clearly stated above. I am impressed by the difference between the work I've seen in the students who have gone through the new curriculum v. that of the previous set of students. Additionally the school has set forth a rigorous lecture series this past year that has beat everything else in town. I have now rehashed my earlier comments; that is all I have to say.

She has a very impressive set of credentials. That sounds good.