Most importantly I want to go a school that would appreciate different school of thoughts, (conceptual as well as practical, like that of Harvard GSD). I don't want an M.arch program (3 years) that pushes me into one direction (for example, a product for the job market).
Cornell’s program strikes me as more progressive, both on design and theories. As a studio art student, I find it more interesting. But I also find that Wustl has a good balance in theories and practice, though it appears relatively less innovative.
I haven't received enough information about Wustl. And I cannot really make up my mind just based on what I have seen on the web and what I heard on the phone.
I have a hard time in deciding between the two, and I have to let the Cornell know of my choice early this week. But I was not able to go to their open house, so I would like to hear some honest and unbiased comments from you (especially those will be / is / has been associated with the schools). Thank you in advance.
I went to the open house and from what I can tell from the student work it ranges from highly theoretical to highly practical. All the students were very over-the-top nice (don't know if Cornell paid them haha) about explaining their work to us and that was definitely one of the best things about Cornell. It feels like a very tight-knit community. Even though everyone tells me it's a very theory-driven curriculum, they spend a semester with SOM in NYC which would be pragmatic.
Everyone in M.Arch I tells me that finding jobs is easy - even in the summer after first year. So that did it for me. :)
I have no information regarding washU aside from my friend that went to the open house saying that 'it's nice'. :P
I'm a current Cornell M.Arch.1 student, and it is pretty theoretical, but the practical matter of practice isn't overlooked. In a nutshell, the mission of the program is to critically examine current and traditional ways of practicing architecture, and train us to be leaders who will shape the discipline in 20 to 30 years. Whether or not you buy that, it makes for an interesting program with a fairly unique take on architecture and pedagogy (at least as unique as one can get and still fall within the NAAB guidelines for accreditation). We have fun with it, even if we don't sleep.
Also, a correction to what anvl stated - our 5th semester is actually currently taught with OMA in NYC, not SOM, which in many respects is its polar opposite.
One thing to plug into the decision is where you want to end up after grad school: sounds like Cornell people tend to go to NYC, while there are strong Wash U contingents in Chicago and St. Louis. One of the key things grad school gives you is a network of people that you might end up working with/for.
Spruce thank you for your answer. I am trying to decide between Cornell and Upenn. Upenn accepted me 1 year March2 program and Corrnel 2.5 year March1 AP program.
I want to study longer however i am not so sure the March quality of Cornell. Upenn has really great Prof.s like Leatherbarrow, Ali Rahim, Cecil Balmond on the other side Cornell has practicing architects in their studio. Most of people says Cornell teaches traditional arch. which is a kind of old stff. They are also not very sure how often practicing architects comes to the studios for critics. my prof. says that don't fall for the fancy architects names like OMA, Rem Koolhaas. They come to their studio only once or twice in one semestre.
Upenn is more digital and focusing more on future systems. If i would be accepted to Upenn's 2 years/3 years March 1 program I would definetly go there. However I am not sure in this situation. Upenn is good in digital design and the last year program of March 1 and March2 has the same curriculum.
I haven't learn anything about digital design in my previous school. So in Upenn my works can look very slow and basic in digital design while studying with March1 students.
I am so worried. I need more help. I am an international std. Please help me :)
Although I went to Penn, it was too long ago to be relevant to your choice now - we had one shared Intergraph computer for design and Autocad v.1 was just starting to show up in the professional offices.
Most of the M.Arch 1's I knew had a solid professional background from undergrad and were either looking for a better grounding in history and theory so they could go into academia or were looking for a credential to set them apart when they returned to their home country. For the later, either school will work. I think Penn still offers a very solid theory program and they continue to bring in good visiting critics, although it is true that many of the big name types just jet in for show (at any school that claims to have them as a teacher). The one-year program packs a lot into the time, and it's not like they are going to throw you out at the end of the year if you want to pursue some particular line of research.
Philadelphia is a good town to be a student in (live in Center City); plenty going on (there are 3 other arch schools + a couple of good art schools) and it's affordable. Ithica is out in the boonies, though it is a beautiful environment.
It is hard to know how to advise without having an idea of your goal.
Apr 15, 10 11:00 pm ·
·
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.
Advice needed! Cornell vs WashU
Fellow Archinectors,
Most importantly I want to go a school that would appreciate different school of thoughts, (conceptual as well as practical, like that of Harvard GSD). I don't want an M.arch program (3 years) that pushes me into one direction (for example, a product for the job market).
Cornell’s program strikes me as more progressive, both on design and theories. As a studio art student, I find it more interesting. But I also find that Wustl has a good balance in theories and practice, though it appears relatively less innovative.
I haven't received enough information about Wustl. And I cannot really make up my mind just based on what I have seen on the web and what I heard on the phone.
I have a hard time in deciding between the two, and I have to let the Cornell know of my choice early this week. But I was not able to go to their open house, so I would like to hear some honest and unbiased comments from you (especially those will be / is / has been associated with the schools). Thank you in advance.
I went to the open house and from what I can tell from the student work it ranges from highly theoretical to highly practical. All the students were very over-the-top nice (don't know if Cornell paid them haha) about explaining their work to us and that was definitely one of the best things about Cornell. It feels like a very tight-knit community. Even though everyone tells me it's a very theory-driven curriculum, they spend a semester with SOM in NYC which would be pragmatic.
Everyone in M.Arch I tells me that finding jobs is easy - even in the summer after first year. So that did it for me. :)
I have no information regarding washU aside from my friend that went to the open house saying that 'it's nice'. :P
Im moving to Seattle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm a current Cornell M.Arch.1 student, and it is pretty theoretical, but the practical matter of practice isn't overlooked. In a nutshell, the mission of the program is to critically examine current and traditional ways of practicing architecture, and train us to be leaders who will shape the discipline in 20 to 30 years. Whether or not you buy that, it makes for an interesting program with a fairly unique take on architecture and pedagogy (at least as unique as one can get and still fall within the NAAB guidelines for accreditation). We have fun with it, even if we don't sleep.
Also, a correction to what anvl stated - our 5th semester is actually currently taught with OMA in NYC, not SOM, which in many respects is its polar opposite.
How was the OMA experience in Cornell?
One thing to plug into the decision is where you want to end up after grad school: sounds like Cornell people tend to go to NYC, while there are strong Wash U contingents in Chicago and St. Louis. One of the key things grad school gives you is a network of people that you might end up working with/for.
Spruce thank you for your answer. I am trying to decide between Cornell and Upenn. Upenn accepted me 1 year March2 program and Corrnel 2.5 year March1 AP program.
I want to study longer however i am not so sure the March quality of Cornell. Upenn has really great Prof.s like Leatherbarrow, Ali Rahim, Cecil Balmond on the other side Cornell has practicing architects in their studio. Most of people says Cornell teaches traditional arch. which is a kind of old stff. They are also not very sure how often practicing architects comes to the studios for critics. my prof. says that don't fall for the fancy architects names like OMA, Rem Koolhaas. They come to their studio only once or twice in one semestre.
Upenn is more digital and focusing more on future systems. If i would be accepted to Upenn's 2 years/3 years March 1 program I would definetly go there. However I am not sure in this situation. Upenn is good in digital design and the last year program of March 1 and March2 has the same curriculum.
I haven't learn anything about digital design in my previous school. So in Upenn my works can look very slow and basic in digital design while studying with March1 students.
I am so worried. I need more help. I am an international std. Please help me :)
Although I went to Penn, it was too long ago to be relevant to your choice now - we had one shared Intergraph computer for design and Autocad v.1 was just starting to show up in the professional offices.
Most of the M.Arch 1's I knew had a solid professional background from undergrad and were either looking for a better grounding in history and theory so they could go into academia or were looking for a credential to set them apart when they returned to their home country. For the later, either school will work. I think Penn still offers a very solid theory program and they continue to bring in good visiting critics, although it is true that many of the big name types just jet in for show (at any school that claims to have them as a teacher). The one-year program packs a lot into the time, and it's not like they are going to throw you out at the end of the year if you want to pursue some particular line of research.
Philadelphia is a good town to be a student in (live in Center City); plenty going on (there are 3 other arch schools + a couple of good art schools) and it's affordable. Ithica is out in the boonies, though it is a beautiful environment.
It is hard to know how to advise without having an idea of your goal.
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.