It comes down to a few factors, by far the most important one being your portfolio.

actually, it sounds like you're applying to the march 1 program, so the portfolio is important but not the biggest thing.

your major won't be the issue. gpa is probably a little lighter than they'd like to see for that kind of major, but if you bring a strong point of view, show some potential for visual creativity, and can show how your current studies would chart a trajectory through the profession (ideally, something of a unique trajectory), you can get around the gpa issue. also, have sterling letters of recommendation. they don't need to be too effusive, just very honest assessments of your capabilities and potential.

finally, tie all of it together by explaining very clearly, in your essay, why harvard (vs. anywhere else). what do they have that you need? what can you bring to the mix at the school?

get those bases covered, and you're 90% there.

i say cross your fingers, that's what i'm doing, i just sent my portfolio in!

where's your undergrad degree from?

I would say if you can trace your ancestory to HH Richardson, Olmsted, Bulfinch, or other notables...no problem bro! Just let
them know you were born with a t-square in your hand...and ya
remember to wear some preppy thing to your interview....

If you don't need financial aid, and have talent evidenced in your portfolio (drawing skills), can muster "influential person" references, and will convey a strong desire to enroll, you have a decent chance. It's not medical school. If you come from a less likely locale and add regional diversity, then that is another favorable factor.

I would definitely disagree with some of the posts. Your portfolio is ALWAYS the most important thing. Also, a need for financial aid has nothing to do with acceptance. That all comes later on in the process.

Ya that is when the difficulties arise.....financial aid......Harvard lost 8 billion dollars over the past few weeks, so don't be looking to the cash cow.

Portfolio is NOT always most important criteria. From a GSD admissions committee-participant professor: "some students are chosen for their perfect GRE scores, some for their portfolio and references, some to provide geographic/worldly diversity, and some because of "influence"/"legacy" considerations. GSD classes do reflect that range of admission considerations.

Having gone through the process last year, I to agree with chicagoarchitect.

having known many many people who have gone to the GSD, I also agree with chicagoarchitect.

They are basically looking for people who have potential to be leaders...

That is ridiculous, toaster and chicagoarchitect. Getting into the GSD is all about the portfolio. If you have an "amazing" portfolio your GPA and recommendations will not be much of a factor. Your work is by far the most important document --- much more important than financial need. However, for those will "good" portfolios, GPA, where a personal went to college, GRE, recommendations, etc. will have an increased role. Financial need still will not play a role.

Harvard did lose a portion of their endowment but the GSD is one of the wealthest architecture schools in the country. If the GSD is suffering, so are all the other architecture schools. While the amount of aid given out this year may be affected, I seriously doubt the school will change how they evaluate applications.

well said Mossman

I'm applying to architecture grad schools, one of them being the GSD, and would like to know more information about the application process.

just make sure the dean knows that you can pay cash for tuition and i doubt you'll have any problems being accepted.

GSD is not "all about portfolio". If your father is wealthy, has checkbook ready, and has influential friends already placed within Harvard administration, and you have a prestigious undergraduate school, a B average, and good breeding, then you will get in. A "polished presentable candidate with that background has NO PROBLEM getting in.

It's the non-affluent family students from the generic undergraduate school with no influential friends or professors who need to "perfect" portfolio and a strong essay, GRE, GPA, etc to gain admittance.

Lol, your rebuttal is almost a year late chicagoarchitect. Where did you get this supposed claim from a GSD admissions committee-participant professor? No school is "all about portfolio", but it is certainly is the most important component at most schools, GSD included. I've talked to many students at this school and other schools, who all said that the portfolio is by far the most important factor. Of course, if you have influential friends in the school administration, that will certainly help, but it is not as beneficial as a strong portfolio, and you will get certainly dinged if your portfolio is shitty.

damn.. some of you cats sound bitter....
i'm in my first year at the gsd right now. it seems to me, after looking at many many of my classmates portfolios as well as many rejected portfolios, that the portfolio is NOT always the most important thing. There are a few people whose portfolios truly are amazing, but that is not the case across the board. there are a few PhDs and stuff who literally didn't have a portfolio at all before the summer programs and whose portfolios are almost entirely text. I've also seen a few people with philosophy degrees. By and large, in undergrad they had a pretty high gpa from a reputable school if their portfolio wasn't amazing. Those people with architecture undergrads (BA, BS, etc) have to have portfolios, but that is not necessarily the case across the board.
Also, all this Blue Blood/ Connections/ Etc stuff is completely ridiculous. I don't know a single person here that has serious connections or has a "legacy" sort of thing. That may be how other schools at Harvard work (and from what i've heard, though this isn't based on anything but hear-say, how Yale works), but by and large, the GSD is very seperate from most of the rest of the University and its admissions are different.

hey peedy, how long was your personal statement?

it always amazes me how people put so much energy into idolizing the GSD and getting into Harvard....there are many programs out there....and yes several of them offer more than the GSD and churn out better work. Just do your best and see what happens...denial is not the end of the world, it may even push you towards a better opportunity or a better school

my personal statement was like 600 words i think? i spent way too long on that....

yeah I'm applying to the GSD this year only because i've applied before and its easy to reapply. Its the one of my 12 schools that im least excited about and think I have the worst chance of getting into. being someone from an architectural background, when i called and asked why I was rejected last time they told me it was 100% based on portfolio (aka it didnt make the 'yes' pile and that was game over)....and also that they accepted 7% of arch-background applicants last year...sigh, whats the point.

and not to discredit you peedy, but 2 of the total 2 people I know who got into gsd were literally/directly placed there based on people they knew.

Obviously Otis 151 was not accepted to the GSD.

thevillian: when you say "based on people they knew," do you mean the people writing their letters of rec? or people on the gsd faculty/admission committee?

they were one in the same. the people writing their recs were on the committee. so I guess its not certain that they were in for that reason only. I try not to be too negative about things like this, but who knows eh?

i'm not saying that it doesn't happen, but at what school is that not true? everyone need letters of recommendation. it doesn't hurt to know people. its also not hard to get to know people.
of the more than 50 students i've talked to about it, maybe only 2 or 3 were directly connected to people in positions to help their acceptance. maybe those are the same 2 students?
its not impossible to get in here... i think alot of it is just pure dumb luck.. i mean, all my undergrad professors told me to not even bother to apply, that there was no way i'd ever get in, that my gpa was too low, my portfolio too bleh, etc etc etc. i guess the people reviewing the portfolios/ reading applications aren't foolproof. ;)

no need to defend yourself or your school..I hear ya. GSD's a great program and I'd love to go there. It's just tough when they only accept 7% of people in my particular situation. its like how much of its dumb luck at that point is what I wonder.

and I totally agree with previous posts about not making it your be all end all to go there. plenty of other great schools.

why does it seem like a lot of people on here hate on gsd so much? really who cares.

Where you not accepted? bad experience their? what is it? I'm applying to grad school in the fall... not gsd.

Not really a big deal an MArch degree is an MArch degree. I know a lot of very talented and respected professors and architects who went there. I know some really bad ones who went there.

You are going to get out of your career what you put into it. But what is with all of the negativity on this thread and others, not even just about GSD but other ivies as well?

Friend showed me an e-mail yesterday from GSD's admissions department, asking alumni to identify and direct to them "highly qualified" hispanic and african-american minority candidates for specific admissions consideration. There, another example that "portfolio" is not most important consideration. Admissions committees know that portfolio content can be fudged, cribbed, or multi-authored. Recommendations, GREs, GPAs, essay, legacy applications from alumni off-spring, children of influential people, admissions policy, faculty and admission committee preferences, etc. all receive consideration. It's still easier to gain admissions into GSD than Harvard's law, medical, or PhD programs.

I have an ivy-league architectural graduate degree. However, when you're a middle-aged architect practicing for twenty plus years, your undergraduate and graduate schools are not relevant to your career.
At least that grad degree was then relatively inexpensive to obtain.
Current cost of graduate degree is a great personal burden that remains long after its professional gloss wears off, if without other sources of financial support. Some young architects will now apply to graduate school and wait out recession. All economic indicators, however, suggest that commercial, multi-family, and institutional real estate markets will remain weak and stagnant for several more years - at minimum - with little development and continued lack of work for architects. Architectural profession is still in severe contraction mode and may not recover to its former capacity for a long time. Architectural grad schools will continue to pump out graduates to a near non-existent job market. The 2nd degree won't necessarily translate into better job security, easier job search, or more interesting professional experiences.

^ dumb, and they spelled "despised" wrong.

That anatomy image is the stupidest thing I've seen in a long time.

heh -- this GSD alum thought it was kinda funny ... if not terribly accurate, spelling included

chicagoarchitect: "Admissions committees know that portfolio content can be fudged, cribbed, or multi-authored."

What do "fudged" and "cribbed" mean?

I think the vast majority of content (probably at least 95%) in these portfolios is not multi-authored, because it would probably wouldn't help to include it, no? It should be your portfolio, not others'. Including material that was multi-authored raises the question: "how much work, exactly, did YOU do on this project?" Sure, you can put down your "task", but the title of the task often does not have any implications of actual work amount.

the person who made that anatomy graphic would never get into the gsd. spelling, typography, writing, lack of self-consciousness.

When I saw the word "GSD" I thought of this:

German Shepherd Dog

Hence when I saw the phrase "Getting into GSD" I thought of entering a female German Shepherd during heat, which is quite fun.

NO!

Harvard watches Archinect.

They're already up my bum about this photo!

Too bad it falls under parody because they're already warning me about copyright violations!

I don't think its Harvard so much as the individual who took that photograph. Perhaps you could find another venue to express your insecurities.

Oh, it's not my insecurity... I am on the same caliber as the people in that photo.

Kept like a pet!

However, unlike most snobs and other general assholes... I will actually admit it.

Being a prick is pretty awesome.

You really went out of your way to find the account that the photo belonged to 10.

You know what? When I sober up tomorrow, I will delete it. Before I delete it,I will send an apology note with it and I will send it to every single person in the GSD department.

How's that?

it was sent around the listserve here. many a laugh was had.

haha... really, peedy?

Orochi, they actually contacted you lol? Or are you just being a drunk bastard?

dude they actually contacted you?

degree in philosophy is pretty good for architecture school I think, because architecture sometimes is nothing but philosophy.

deep