University reputations only matter if you work in the same city as the school. Some offices will have a nostalgic view of job applicants if their portfolios reflect projects/teachers they themselves had in the past but what really matters is the work, not the name on the degree. Even the top schools still produce C students and I've always told kids that their degrees are only as good as the lowest passing grade. The work you do is what will make you stand out.

I have what some called exotic university credentials (being one of less than a handful of architects in my city with my academic background) and I cringed every time I was introduced as "here is X, he's from Y university." It's for show and you should want your competence and skill to be your selling point, not the name on the piece of paper in that frame hanging in the spare bedroom.

... but you were still introduced as "from Y university." Doesn't that suggest people do care? (even if that's not what you want people to care about)

Nate, I got where I am now not because of the name but because of the strength of my portfolio and related skills. Having a exotic sounding school might get more attention but I would be very surprised if the name held any weight compared to the applicant's skills.

I don't wear my alumni on my sleeve because I want to gain respect from my peers and colleagues because of my work. The introduction thing stopped after I mentioned something like similar to my above comment.

Polo,
Do you want to practice in oz or nz? It appears to me from what you've written that the benefits going to a school like RMIT are negligible and costly unless you want to jump the ditch. I'm a (honorary) kiwi by marriage and I lived in Sydney for a year, so I think I have an unique understanding of the differences. Regardless, cream rises to the top, and the longer I've been at this, the more impressed I am with people who necessarily didn't go to the best school but are crushing it professionally.

As far as work goes, any interest in participating in the rebuild?

Been working around 10 years.

 

NO.

I came from a no name school - NewSchool of Architecture in San Diego - I was able to get a job at SOM because I knew how to put a building together and with Revit - it's what you can do more than the school - even though most of my co-workers came from GSD, GSAAP and other "names"

I would say yes and no...

I went to a "no where school in fly-over USA" (-some girl last weekend) and I get introduced as going to Y school here on the East Coast numerous times.  In interviews sometimes I'll get a gasp when they hear my school but my portfolio is strong.  I have lost a potential job because they wanted ivy even though they thought my portfolio was better (talked at an awards ceremony with an employ afterwards).  My first job out of school, I was competing against a GSD grad and the current job I'm replacing an MIT grad.  So it all depends on the firm and what they value.  I'm applying to grad school this application season so I hope to go somewhere that is highly regarded so that I don't have to keep explaining my school to people. 

I would say since they're comparable, don't base your decision on speculated future rewards.  Decide based on where you feel you would have the most beneficial experience (with the added in cost as a factor). 

 

I won't be verbose, but I see two things, at least for the U.S.:

1)  if you want national relocation opportunities, then the hoyty-toyty schools help because it's the alums become like a fraternity (where women are admitted as well - imagine that).

2)  if you have a preferred geographic location for employment in mind, then the public universities in this case will do just fine - thinking Univ. of Florida for most of Florida, Georgia Tech for Atlanta, Univ. of Minnesota for Minneapolis, and Arizona State for Phoenix, among many examples like this.  There will be many alums in the area, so the local schools are a known quantity.

people nowa days don't have time for explanations - If I had to do it over again, I would have gone to a name. Anytime you have to explain something and you are competing against a a candidate that doesn't have to, then you lose. 

If I had to do it over again

If I had a dollar for every time I've said or thought this ...

This is a problem that seems to be unique to the east coast of the US...part of the reason why I have little interest in working there.

No one cares where you went to school after you understand how a building goes together.

This is the key thing you need to use to evaluate a school.

will they let you study they types of buildings you want to study?

Nothing else matters if the best school only does blob shaped museums in every studio and you want to design affordable housing out of salvaged stuff then that is not the school for you.  Look for a program that allows you to chose a thesis topic or consistently assigns studio projects in the area you want to work in.

The graduate studio projects will be the cornerstone of your portfolio for the first few years of your career. Choose flexibility and or a school that specializes in what you want to have in your portfolio. Good design can come from any program Harvard Yale MIT don't hold a monopoly on good ideas, they attract lots of insanely talented people, but you can have an incredible graduate portfolio anywhere as long as you have the freedom to do so in your program and faculty who are less concerned about standard format and instead focus on teaching you skills you will need to succeed as an architect.

The next Two or three years are setting a course for your future career, take time to ask and look around.

Peter N

This is the key thing you need to use to evaluate a school.

will they let you study they types of buildings you want to study?

Very good points, Peter.  A slate of varied building typologies, devoid of  a stylistic mandate, points to a better program in my mind.  This, in fact, is part of their personality.  So are the types of people in attendance, the general level of cooperation or laissez-faire culture instead of competition, and allowing oneself to create the type of architect they want to be.

While I have few, if any, complaints about the sequence of building projects I was assigned in my studios, I did have an issue with its not broaching theoretical discourse and design fundamentals, either prior to, or as cohorts to studios, in addition to several professors who were more laissez-faire than they should have been and needed to have their salaries docked.

Peter - always insightful.

Will they let you study they types of buildings you want to study?

Great point, I had a friend get into PennDesign and then they looked at the student work and it looks like this.  They are not at all into the blobitecture and so their initial excitement to get into an ivy waned. I made sure the school I applied to catered to my interest of the expanded agency of architecture+landscape+urbanism.  

Polo, as mentioned prior- are you considering working in Aus? If so, then I would say yes it is worth the jump (at least in Melbourne, having been to RMIT myself).

I can't talk for the architectural culture around the world, but in Melbourne there is definitely a degree of nepotism- inbreeding even. You would have a much better chance of working in a good office in Melb. if you studied at RMIT or Melb. univ- firms here have a tendency to hire from the schools they were born out of.

TYP & ecnal,

I've been looking around on the web for architecture related jobs in New Zealand and Australia, and it is very clear that Aus has a much bigger market. Therefore working in Aus means a higher employment rate and chances to be involved in bigger, complex, and more interesting projects. Building a bigger connections and recognition might be easier overseas as well.

To answer you question, yes I do plan on working in Australia in the future for the aforementioned reason. Call me naive but I feel very ambitious with my career path, and I hope to work all over the world. Australia seems like the most logical next step for me.

I have also been looking for work in NZ and surprisingly there aren't as much work in Christchurch as you think with the rebuild and everything. Right now I am not picky, so I will generally be glad to work for whoever that offers me a job.

From everyone's reply it seems that 90% of the people believes that the individual's ability, portfolio and experience is what matters especially if the universities are comparable and as long as you have the recognized qualification (BAS, MArch).

Setting reputation aside, how much do you think that the country/location of the university affect employment opportunity for that particular country?

Anyone know any university in Australia besides RMIT or Melbourne Univ that has a good post grad program? Univ of Sydney, Monash, Univ of NSW, etc?

Is there any benefits to switching to a different university for your post grad? Such as  showing that you are versatile and you have a wider range of knowledge as different universities will have different teaching approaches?

^Is it about showing a wider range of knowledge or having one? Having gone to two different schools for grad and undergrad, I strongly believe it is beneficial to you and by association your job prospects. I don't really know if it benefits you from employers perception of your education... but your network is bound to grow.