these are my (outsider) thoughts on UW

scandinavia - yes
interdisciplinary - no
furniture - i think this is new
materiality/details - maybe when holl was there
laid back studio - seemed to be
theory - nah


that being said, i wouldn't go to UW unless i was
a. from the NW
b. wanted to work in the NW

More specifically wanted to work for Miller-Hull

I did my undergrad at UW they do have a furniture studio although I believe the professor that taught it when I was there has retired I hope they kept it going because the work that was produced was really nice.

As for the materiality / details it depends on the studio I never had much of it but I did see some that dealt with that.

my studio professor got his undergrad & grad at UW. he knows very little about theory, knows nothing of design process, or "pushing the envelope of concept", and is big in sustainability. i don't know if this helps.

* but is big in sustainability...

yeah, this all helps...i guess my main concern is that Berkeley looks wonderful on paper and on their website, but when it comes down to it, are they are just shoving digital processes down the throats of their students? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy digital work and think it would be nice to know the programs...but I don't think that how 'cool' something looks is a good measure of how good something is.

I had a friend just recently graduate from berkeley's undergrad. I asked him what the overall program was like and he responded by saying that the school emphasises and pushes concept.

My best suggestion is for you to go visit each school. They are both good schools.

i just graduated from berkeley with my MArch. shoving digital down your throat? that made me laugh out loud and i nearly choked on my coffee. where did you get that idea?
if anything their digital program is just starting to emerge - which is a good thing, lots of great people and ideas there right now. but all of the oldie but goodies are still there. you can make the program anything you want it to be.

i would suggest visiting as well, make up your own mind. and while i can't compare it to UWash - i loved my time there and you won't beat that level of education for the price of in-state tuition (which even if you aren't a CA resident yet, you will be by your 2nd year). and the bay area is about as good as it gets, not to mention you have an entire first rate research institution at your fingertips.

MArch n' unemployed:

would you say that the older faculty embraces the digital program?

just as a counter point to cranky pantz, i had a professor who did his grad in uw, and hes great, very knowledgeable, knows alot about theory, and highly pushes the design process... im just saying, it depends from person to person, just like march said, u make it anything u want it to be,,

visit both if u can

tmskim: depends who. some more than others

Hello all,
long-time lurker, first-time poster.

I am a second-year MArch III student at Cal, and two years ago, I was attempting to choose between Berkeley and UW.

My best advice to you is what someone else already said: go visit each program and campus, meet students and professors, and go with your gut reaction.

That being said, I obviously chose Cal, and right now, it seems to have been a good decision, but honestly I don't think I'll know for sure for 5-10 years, when I figure out what I want to be when I grow up. I love UW and Seattle, and see myself living in the area when I am finished with school... but Berkeley just seemed like the better fit for me.

A little food for thought on Cal architecture and the current posts/comments:
- I agree with MArch on "making it what you want"...however, I would disagree on the digital comment -- digital is prevalent, now. My class (started in fall 07) began with the digital tools (Rhino, mostly) right off the bat, and I've seen it trickle up thru studios, to students who came as option I and II. Going digital right away was rough, but now I am glad I learned it early, when there was a little more room for floundering. There's little to no hand-drawing, at least in 200A, the fundamental arch. studio that all incoming option III folks (and MS / PhD students) must take...and 200A is a rocky, rocky time. Very difficult. The thing I try to remember with Rhino and other programs of its ilk are that they are just tools to test and communicate ideas -- I want things to work and be able to understand them as spaces, and sometimes this gets lost in all the blobby buildings and curvy surfaces.

- the "old guard" (less digital faculty) is still around, and there is tension between these two schools of thought, which makes me kind of crazy because I believe that there are valuable things to be learned from each -- and I don't really understand why one must choose.

- Berkeley is a great public institution, but you need to come in knowing what you want to get from your education, and be willing to go after it. Get to know professors, ask for stuff, stick your neck out. It's disorganized and communication is not always the greatest. However, I think that the faculty is top-notch, and if you are persistent, you will get a very good education.

- theory: depends on the professor and what you are looking for. I've had good experiences in this area: arch. history, contemporary theory, and a semester of Corbu (this is an elective, and great for someone like me, without a strong arch. background)

- interdisciplinary: again, have to go get it. The architecture program is the most insular in the school (personal opinion). The MLA's and MCP's spend much more time mixing, which is really sad because there are so many great students. I'm taking a seminar cross-registered with city planning right now, about housing in the developing world, and I'm really enjoying it. I hope to take another next semester.

- there are several new dynamic faculty (studio) -- Nicholas de Monchaux and Ron Rael -- who are really exciting and accessible professors.

I know this is a lot of information -- I got a little carried away. Please remember that it's just my opinion and experience, and I hope it helps. Really, visit each place and go with your gut.

Thanks and good luck!

Eeeek, now I am having posters'-remorse..... i feel so exposed! (and I did it to myself...) good luck -- you'll get a great education at either place.

Awesome, thanks for the posts laissezfaire and MArch. I am actually heading out for the Berkeley open house on the 6th (regrettably I can't make the UWash one, but I have visited it before). I'll be sure to talk to some of the professors and students while I'm there (I am really interested in working with Mark Anderson, does he still teach studios that result in actual built installations?) Glad to hear that some of the 'old gaurd' is still around, but its to bad it creates tension with the digierati...I think it could make for a really interesting dynamic. Anywho, I have got lots of stuff to look for now when I go out there...thanks again

Laissezfaire -

can you eleborate on the tension between two schools of thought?

laissezfaire: i won't be able to make the open house on april 6, but i'm considering the april 18 cal day... do you know much about it? specifically: if i'll be able to get the same exposure to the program as i would at the open house and if the faculty or students will be on hand? do you recommend an alternative option/time for visiting the school? i want to learn a great deal about the program, but scheduling conflicts dictate more limited options for doing so.

nonamenum3: would you be willing to share your takeaways from the april 6 open house?

archny: yeah I could share what I learn from the open house...I guess I could post it to this thread if other people feel that it will be beneficial, otherwise I'll just send you a personal email. anything in particular you would like me to look out for?

on a separate note, anyone reading this thread going to the open house for UWash?

Great to see all this useful dialogue...

First, Archny, you can get a sense of the architecture program when you come on 4/18 (campus-wide "we love cal! day), but it won't be the song-and-dance they do for admitted students' day in the architecture (and planning/MLA) programs on 4/6. (Try to get the info from that event if you can -- it might be helpful.) That said, before you come on 4/18, i would encourage you to contact those professors you are most interested in, and attempt to set up a meeting. Be forewarned -- some of them can be hard to pin down, but it's certainly worth the effort. Also, you should visit studios and see if you can sit in on any reviews/pin-ups. Specifically, grad students -- either the 200's (first year, three-year MArch) or any 201 (option) studios (mix of all Arch students). These generally happen on Wednesday and Thursday afternoon, so if you can, try to plan your visit accordingly. Check with Lois in the architecture office to see what's going on and she should be able to connect you.

And, per tmskim's question about tensio between digirati and the "old guard".... mostly I think it is a personality conflict, of both deciding that they are obviously right, and that the other tools/ideas/designs/etc. of the other couldn't possibly be useful. The tension appears to come squarely down on a choice between "sustainability" and "sexy-curvy-maynotbeabuilding-object-making", both of which can be problematic, but if they are used well, can result in some amazing stuff. It seems that many students go in one direction or another, and the digital stuff is certainly creating a groundswell towards the latter "". However, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, as long as the dialogue is kept open -- which is not always the case.

I hope this is helpful -- I know this second point may seem a bit esoteric, but it's hard to explain without experiencing it... and it's equally hard to come down on either side of the divide. if you have other questions, let me know -- good luck with your decisions!

NoNameNum3 ,

i called UW today inquiring about when the open house was. I was told they do not hold an open house, however have receptions every friday, where you are taken on a tour and have the opportunity to sit in on studios. Did you get different information then that?

also, i have not gotten an acceptance/ rejection letter yet, so an open house may not even be relevant for me!

mccloskm: I got an email from the program coordinator stating: "the Department of Architecture Visitor's Day for students offered admission is Friday, April 3rd." It seems like it might only be for those who have been formally accepted into the program, but I'm not sure. Who knows, maybe you could just show up anyway?

Hopefully you get your letter soon and good luck!

NoName - did you end up going to the open house at Cal on the 6th? Care to share your experiences/thoughts? I will be starting at Berkeley as an MArch III this fall, and am really curious to hear other people's reactions to the program, as I wasn't able to attend the open house.

Thanks in advance for any info!

njohn - yeah I ended up going to the open house. I was really impressed with what I saw; the professors, the studio culture and just general vibe of the school. Impressed enough that I as well will be joining the program in the fall (the Option II program).

Probably my favorite thing about the school is how it is run. It being a research institution, I think the opportunity to explore our own interests is better than any other school I looked at. And it also seemed as if diversity of interest was respected and encouraged...something that doesn't happen everywhere.

The professors seemed pretty on top of it, the work that they were doing was just as exciting as some of the work coming out of the school. And the professors seemed to demand a level of maturity of thought from the students...they didn't seem interested in your ability to regurgitate the latest trend, but instead wanted to see true critical thinking.

One thing was that I didn't actually see a lot of "architecture" while I was walking around, and it was a general concern of many of the other students visiting that they wouldn't learn the technical skills required to be an architect. I agree with their concerns at some level, but for the most part I am interested in working outside our current architectural paradigm. Yes we need to understand how to communicate our ideas graphically, and we need to understand how a building is made...but who says the currently accepted ways of doing these things is the best? I think that Berkeley provides opportunity to learn the technical side of architecture, it just comes in a different form then we are used to...and you have to be proactive and seek it out.

Yeah the school was pretty disorganized, but again I think you have to show up with a level of maturity and self-motivation to get a good education there...no one is going to hold your hand.

Thanks for your thoughts, NoName. Your insights seem to be more or less in line with what I heard from Cal students and professors when I visited informally a couple months back - that there's a lot of flexibility, but that ultimately it is what you make it.

Glad to hear that your impression was that a number of the professors are doing exciting work outside of the school. I didn't get as much of a sense of that one way or the other, so it's good to hear.

As for the technical skills, I'm also a bit nervous on that front, but am with you in hoping that a proactive approach will yield the experience that we want/need.

Anyhow, thanks for the report. See you in the fall!

NoNameNum3, i came across this posting as I was looking for info pertaining to UWash. I know they are big on urban design and sustainability, which happens to be an area that Berkeley program is known for as well. In your opinion, which grad sch has an edge over the other?And r u currently enrolled in march of berkeley? or r u with Uwash?

Wld u also have other insights into the uwash march program?
Thanks man.

Honestly, the only thing I know about the UWash program is what I learned through my decision process...and I opted against UWash and ended up in Berkeley.

So I don't know exactly how good Washington's sustainability stuff is, but Berkeley's is pretty top notch, and now that I am at the school and can see what is going on with their programs...I think a school would be hard pressed to top Berkeley's approach. I mean, Berkeley is a research institute, and so the approach to sustainability falls into that same school of thought. Again, I can't really speak concretely about UWash, but it seemed to me that they will give you a very strong understanding of the issues surrounding the topic as it stands right now. Berkeley, on the other hand, seems to always be searching for what is next, what other solutions are out there...and that comes from having a strong baseline to jump off of.

NNN3, Can you tell us a bit about your first impressions of Berkeley? Maybe, tell us everything?

yeah, thanks NoNameNum3. I cant disagree with you when you say Berkeley's leading the pack in the area of sustainability. I mean, it's the name at the top of everyone's head when i asked for a school which has a strong focus on sustainability !

The reason why i am asking (which you prolly have guessed), is i am caught between either of the 2 schools. I guess I will put in an application and see how things go....

Honestly, UWash's curriculum looks pretty decent too. I just need an insider view on how well they really are doing. I don't want to end up in a grad school and feel totally uninspired. From your description, I guess you are having an awesome time in Berkeley!

BTW, would you know which profs in Berkeley have a particularly strong interest in the area of sustainable development? And do you get a lot of opportunities to interact with the grad students from MLA or MUP? Like, doing cross-departmental projects and stuff. That'd be so cool.

ffqh: 1st post on here and I know I'm really late to this thread.

Thought I'd jump in real quick, as I graduated from UW a few years ago and have some friends in the grad program there right now. I generally agree with holz's comments at the beginning of the thread w/ a few caveats.
The furniture program has been around for a long time (not that new) and there's also a design / build studio taught by Steve Badannes that's good (you can finish school w/ another built work under your belt). However, in terms of digital fabrication, there's not much of that going on. I know there's a model fabricator now, but in the large shop, you won't be able to do the Rhino-to-fabricator thing yet.
As far as I know, the Scandinavia thing is still going, the Rome Center is pretty rad, right in the Campo de Fiori, there's also a Switzerland trip in the summer taught by an instructor I really liked. I hear there's a Japan studio and there's been talk for a long time about an India studio...
The studio culture is laid back compared to what I see at sci-arc but like all studios, it's ultimately what you make of it. I was able to find time during undergrad to squeeze in a couple competitions (although it was really tight) and stay really busy.
I also agree that the school's reputation beyond Seattle is a little weak. There's not any emphasis on what's big down here in LA (and it sounds like parts of Bezerkely now?) You'll come up against some downright hostility to blobs and most other really far out there kinda stuff. If you like "phenomenology" of the Zumthor / Ando variety, you should feel pretty comfortable there.
There's still a real emphasis on hand drawing and old school physical models alongside some sketchup and illustrator. You won't be learning maya or rhino unless you want to do it on your own.
I don't know, from my undergrad experience I got some great projects and liked a lot of my instructors, but I also feel they really short change people on the digital end and, even with all the international studios, there's a real insular "Seattle" feel to the whole thing. And yeah, if you want to work for Miller / Hull, UW is your school.
In sustainability, I'm surprised no one's mentioned University of Oregon. I mean, Berkely and UW have some different emphasis, with sustainability being one of them, but from my limited, annecdotal experience, kids coming out of U of O are really knowledgeable about the green stuff and that's what the school really focuses on.
I'm scanning through William's UW blog from last year, however, and seeing some new stuff of the "research architecture" variety, so maybe things are changing.

To sum UW up in my experience:

Building actual "stuff" and learning details - Yes
International studios - Yes
"Traditional" tectonic & massing approach to design - Yes
Large School w/ Lots of Resources - Yes
Sustainability - OK

Digital Fabrication - Probably not
"Research" Architecture - A little bit
Blobs & scripting - Probably not
Networking Beyond Seattle - Probably not
Story-based stuff (like AA or Bartlett) - nope
Interpretive dance of Mike Davis's City of Quartz, scripted in Python and performed by your avatar in 2nd Life - not in a million years.

washington was on my "maybe" list of applications this year. then a professor I really respected in undergrad recommended it (over UT, rice and maryland) and now im reconsidering applying. the thing is most of my portfolio is highly digital and sort "of the moment" stuff that was a product of my undergrad, so im worried they might be turned off by that. but for that very reason im interested in UofW...to get something different, to balance my education. much like my desire to rid myself of all my material stuff and just move to chile, I would love to not touch a computer for 2 years while honing in my skills in architecture at a much more intimate level. I currently work with a group of guys who graduated VT and I have a feeling that they're into similar stuff, so that'd be an interesting segway.

the "no pull outside of Seattle" thing scares me a bit. I love that city, but dont see myself living there after school.

Villan: Intimate is probably a good word to describe the approach taken in many studios.
Some specific profs have strong ties outside the area and a few of my classmates have been really successful finding work outside of Seattle. I think a big reason there's a lack of pull is that almost everyone I went to school with just didn't want to leave Seattle and so over time, you don't have a lot of people getting out of the NW. It is a really nice place to live.
My last post made it sound like I go to sci-arc, but I don't. Just have a friends going there. That being said, I have the opposite problem you do, where I'd like some more digital work to complement a lot of the hand drawings and physical models I've made. I think if you've already got that, than UW could be a great choice.

ffqh: Yeah, so what I have seen in mine limited time here is that the big sustainability people are Susan Ubbelhode, Harrison Fraker, and Chirs Benton. For example, Susan is taking a bunch of students to Peru next semester to research waterfront sustainability and re-appropriation and Fraker's teaching a studio this semester that is working on a master plan for a net-zero carbon emissions office park, among other things.

As far as working with the landscapers and planners...sadly the architecture department kind of keeps to itself. But just as is the case at Berkeley, there are always a few students who do a lot of cross over. You can take classes across the entire CED for your electives, like I am taking a landscape class next semester and I have a friend taking a planning class. I think every few years or so they have a cross over studio, but the interest has to come from the students first.

NLW2: I don't really know where to begin, but I really enjoy the program here at Berkeley. I guess what first struck me was simply the caliber of my fellow students. For the most part, everyone has quite a bit of life experience and they all have strong interests...you don't get a lot of people who just do whatever, everyone seems to be actively pursuing different educational paths.