Hi All -

I'm throwing my hat in as another 2010 applicant.

Quick Facts:
Currently living in NYC
Originally from Denver (still my permanent address)
Undergrad in design from U. of Notre Dame
Have been working as a graphic designer for 5 years
Looking at applying to Columbia, Berkeley, ASU, CU Denver

A Few Q's:
1. I saw that Arizona State University has a program where you can get your MBA and MARCH in 3 years. Any thoughts on this program?

2. University of Colorado at Denver is my home-state option. Any thoughts on this program?

I'll be in the GSAPP summer program, so look forward to meeting those of you who will be in NYC this summer....

Gin: "Back in 2007 I would have been happy to take on $100k in student loan debt to attend Cornell or GSD, but the collapse of the economy has forced me to re-think my priorities. Hence, the reason for having a few more state schools on my list this time around."

Ditto that. Aww, maybe I'm growing up. I'm starting to realize there's no such thing as job stability no matter your credentials. Even a couple of years ago there was probably nothing anyone could have said to deter me from wanting to apply to all the $$$$ schools.

I will likely be applying for 2010 as well.

My stats:

Will finish my B.A. in Urban Planning at Cal State Northridge Fall 2009
Currently interning in Design Management at a big public entity
Just became a LEED AP
Going to do Jump Start Intro to Arch @ UCLA this summer
No portfolio yet, but will be developing this summer and onward

Thinking about applying to UC Berkeley (in state = cheap, seemingly awesome program and focus on sustainability... going to visit the school soon), UPenn (seems to have a heavy focus on urban planning, which is my background), Columbia (location, association with the Earth Institute)

Hey, so I need some advice on letters of recommendation...

I know that fall quarter I'll be absolutely slammed with work, and combining that with applying to grad schools will make it a tough few months, so should I be collecting my letters of recommendation this summer? Or even right now?

I haven't gone through this process before, so correct me if I'm wrong, but... I'll need 3 letters of rec, right?

And, when I ask 'Mr. White' for a recommendation, I'll need to tell him what schools exactly I'm applying to, so he can address each one of them in different letters? Isn't it easier just to get a generic letter and re-address or slightly modify the letter to match the school? If I have to do it the former way then I'll need to make up my mind about grad schools real soon, then.

Also, are the people reviewing the apps looking for recs from academia? Do they put less stock in letters from professionals? I've been at co-op half of my undergrad, and subsequently have developed more relationships on that side of the fence.

Would a really well-written, eloquent, and thoughtful request for rec's via email be more appropriate than a phone call when I ask my professors? (since I'm on co-op and will soon be abroad) Getting them on the phone is hard enough!

I guess I'm slightly anxious about the whole thing - it's not like I have terribly close-knit relationships with my past professors. Has anyone actually refused to write a letter of rec for you, before? Or would they just ask you to write it yourself, and then sign it.

P.S. When's the ideal time to take your GRE's? How long did you study for it? Can you recommend any good study material/guide?

Concerning the Letter of recommendation:

If I ask this fall's profs for recs, they will have only known me for 2 months or so. If I ask profs last semester, they may have forgotten me. What do I do?

^ yeeaaap.

In general I think you want to get L.O.R. from people that wont forget you in one semester's time.

I have the issue of having to ask professors I haven't worked with in 3 or 4 years. Does anyone have any experience with this? I'm not too concerned because we had good working relationships in schools, I'm just concerned with: "hey, I know we haven't talked in a few years, but do you mind writing me 10 recommendations?"

also, I might have to ask a boss who doesn't know im going to grad school for one. tough thing to think about doing in this economy.

Hrmm, any seasoned graduates have input on our dilemmas?

jk3hl...

I will attempt to answer your questions based on my experience apply to m.arch progs two years ago:

-yes, get LORs lined up asap
-yes, 3 per school
-tailor each letter to each school. at least mention their name.
-they prefer at least one from professional, and I dont think they put any less stock in them
-I emailed all my recommenders last time
-I've never had experience with either of your two concerns...and I've asked some pretty brash/egotistical people

Do rec's have to mail their letters directly to the university admissions office? I collect and submit them myself, correct?

Its a mixed bag of: them sending it directly, them sending it to you to send, or them submitting electronically through the schools application website

Then I shouldn't solicit anyone for rec's until a few weeks before admission opens?

Well at least talking to your recommenders once you get an idea of what you're going to do isn't a bad idea, so they're not completely surprised. But yeah, don't get into sending actual recs until you have the admin stuff rolling on your apps.

This is a lazy question, but when typically do MArch programs open for admission?

Usually around the start of the fall semester or quarter, in my experience. Check the school's website to be certain.

Not looking forward to starting my physics and math pre-req's.

It has been far too many years since I even remotely pondered such subjects in an academic setting.

If you became really enamoured with a design competition and participated on your own initiative, but couldn't register because of an exorbitant registration fee - is it unethical to include the work in a portfolio labelled as "design work done for such-and-such competition?"

Would you just say the project was self-initiated? Would graduate school jurors be turned off by the fact I've done the work outside of school?

I'd think that any design work you do just for shits and giggles -- outside of school or the office -- would be seen as a positive, not a negative. The projects in my portfolio that seemed to get the most positive reactions were the ones I did purely as personal projects.

i think you're fine. Your design was based on a speculative competition, and thus owes itself to that competition, regardless if you entered it or not.

dont say it's self-initiated, because thats more of a lie than your original concern. I dont think any grad program advisor would be turned off by work outside of school just because its outside of school.

these stats nearly made me crap my pants:

link

any thoughts on the number of applicants this next go around? will it be the same, less, or will people still be freaked out by the economy and flock to graduate programs in droves?

vilan what does this datum reflect?

oh sorry...its Princeton's graduate admissions statistics for the last five cycles. If you scroll to the second page, at the top, there's the school of architecture. Just looking at the overall trends, this looks like a pretty depressing time to be applying to m.arch

@villain: that's been my concern too. i'm pretty sure the trend will be similar for all schools right now. instead of being freaked out about not getting in anywhere, maybe we can be all positive about it. look at it as a chance to challenge ourselves/step it up even more than we otherwise may have (not saying we all slacked off before, but hopefully you know what i mean).

my priority for admission is my portfolio because i think i have the academic/professional side well covered. i have been out of practice with my drawing and art for a while because i've been so focused on academic versus creative work. i think i'm going to start taking drawing and painting classes in my community to get the juices flowing again.

shit.

Oh just to give some advice that I was given about LOR's. Someone suggested that applicants should always get one more than the required amount. If they ask for 3 LOR, they will never question 4 but will think twice about accepting you if only two show up at the office. I had asked 4 professors to write me letters, based on the advice given to me. Of course, one of my professors didn't send the letter in, even after I emailed that prof. 4 times and sent a personally letter to his house. So, in the end your professors are busy people and sometimes will forget... so play it safe and have all your bases covered. Good luck everyone!

Hey, I noticed a lot of schools (UCLA, GSD, etc.) offer two MArch programs, one being for undergrads with non-architectural degrees, and the other for undergrads with a "5-year bachelor degree in Architecture or it's equivalent."

By equivalent, does that include a degree like the University of Cincinnati (where I attend?) It's a 4 year Bachelor of Science degree in Architecture. Am I totally excluded from schools like the above, or what?

Your degree ( I should say 'ours' because I have it also), does not qualify for this program. "5-year bachelor degree in Architecture or it's equivalent" is a five year, B.Arch, PROFESSIONAL degree. our degree is PRE-professional, and requires at least a portion of the M.arch to make it professional.

no, you're not excluded from the school, we just, technically, need to enroll in the M.arch 1 path (which is for non-arch backgrounds), with the HOPE that we can be pardoned from a year or more of it for our experience.

You're not excluded from applying to any school you wish, but the particular M.Arch. program you're eligible to apply for will depend on your undergraduate degree.

If you have a non-architecture degree, you'll apply to a first-professional M.Arch. program, which will typically be 3 to 3.5 years in length.

If you have a pre-professional BA or BS degree in architecture, you'll apply to the same first-professional M.Arch. program as above, but you may be able to skip the first year or opt out of certain course requirements. Any advanced standing will be granted at the discretion of the program you're applying to, and some are more strict than others.

For those who already have a 5-year professional B.Arch. degree or equivalent* the post-professional M.Arch. degree offers a way to study architecture at an advanced level or to focus on a particular area of interest. This program will typically be 1.5 to 2 years in length.

Keep in mind that most universities will name their various M.Arch. degree tracks as M.Arch. I, M.Arch. II, and M.Arch. III. However, there doesn't seem to be a universal standard among universities about which designation applies to which degree track. For most schools, the M.Arch. I is the first-professional degree, but I've also seen one or two schools use that designation for their post-professional degree. You'll have to read the descriptions from the specific schools you're applying to. Something called an M.Arch. II at one school might be the same program as something called an M.Arch. III at another school.

* The "equivalent would most likely be from an overseas university, since there really is no "equivalent" in the US. You either have a professional B.Arch. degree or you don't.

Ohhh. Okay, thanks guys.

Damn, that sucks though. On the other hand, would my portfolio and application be judged in the bracket with other non-architecture/design undergrads? Does this give me a better chance of acceptance, in a way?

Probably depends on the school. Some may lump all the applications in together, while others may create a separate applicant pool for those with pre-professional degrees. Almost every school will want a healthy mix of people from various architectural and non-architectural backgrounds.

jk: i'm assuming since there are 3 tracks, each portfolio would only be evaluated according to the specific track they are applying for, not that all applicants to the entire architecture school would be pooled together. only seems logical since they're all coming in with totally different skill sets/levels.

anyone who knows for certain, is this correct?

The post-professional M.Arch. applicants would be a different pool altogether. Some schools may combine the non-architecture and pre-professional candidates into a single pool, though.

Here's a question:

Next month I'll be back home in Cincinnati for a week to visit family, do some research for my undergrad thesis, and basically hang around town for a bit. By coincidence, the week I'll be in town also happens to be the first week of UC's summer quarter. If all works out the way I'm hoping, I'll be starting my M.Arch. degree at DAAP exactly that time next year.

I've already spent plenty of time wandering around the UC campus and I did the whole DAAP open house and tour thing last fall, but I'd love to sit in on the very first session of the M.Arch. studio, just to get a feel for what to expect on Day One. Does anybody think this would be permitted, or does this sound like a really dumb idea?

A few questions, two of which were asked in another thread and overlooked for at least a week.

Anyone think it would be a good idea (or want to join me, perhaps) in starting a blog to document the application process to Architectural Graduate programs?
Any reason to think such a blog, found by admissions admins, would negatively (or possibly positively) effect my chances at admission into any schools? I just think it would make for a fun and interesting year long blog piece.

Two questions asked elsewhere to no avail...
Is there any reason anyone with an MArch from a european school wouldn't be able to attend an MArch III program somewhere here in the states, to get an accredited degree? The only reason I can see why this would be difficult is academic resistance to admitting anyone for a second Masters, even if for one year.

Applying to architecture schools with a pre-professional non-architectural degree I have been wondering, are there any European analogs to the American 3-year MArch 1 program? I am putting together a list of graduate programs to apply to for Fall '10 and I would love to put a couple european schools on that list, but I am going into this with a BA in Mathematics, although along with 6 years of work experience in architecture.

I'd love a solid, knowledgeable answer, I've been wondering for some time.

Rascuache - you don't have a background in architecture. Almost no European school has a master degree for students with a non-arch background - as such you would most likely have to start over from the beginning in Europe.

I'm a graphic designer in NYC planning on applying for M.Arch I programs. I went to Brown University and majored in art and critical theory; graduated 5 years ago. Good GPA. My portfolio will be pretty much all graphic design work--books, ephemera and environmental graphics. I also am a painter and have been consistently producing work and getting fellowships/residencies over the years. I don't think I'll have time/means to do a summer program. Is it alright not to have any architectural design in portfolio? Haven't taken GRE yet. I really need to study and relearn the little math I once knew.

My wish list so far:

Princeton
Yale
UVa
Penn

I'd like to stay on east coast, but am also looking into ASU (I'm originally from Phoenix), UCLA and UW.

I'm pretty comfortable with theory and would like to have exposure to urban design. Does anyone know anything about RISD or Maryland? Or any other programs to look into???

Annagraph -

As long as you're applying for the 3 year M.Arch programs, there's no need/expectation for you to have architectural design in your portfolio. I was admitted to Berkeley based on a portfolio that was entirely photography/writing (my background), and I have two very close friends that are at Columbia right now who also didn't include any arch stuff in their portfolios.

I think the general wisdom is to show your strengths, whatever those may be, and to keep in mind how to demonstrate a strong visual and spatial intelligence with the materials you're presenting.

Lastly, if you're interested in urban design, I would seriously consider adding MIT, Berkeley and Harvard to your list. In my opinion, they're the three schools that integrate the MArch, LArch and Planning students most functionally, and that produce the most interesting research/projects in the field of urban design. Penn also does a pretty good job with this, and has an outstanding LArch program to draw on.

Some of the other schools on your list have a reputation for being pretty traditional (though awesome), which might mean less opportunity to explore questions/problems in urban design.

njohn,

Im curious, which schools on AG's list do you consider traditional? Because i might be applying to similar schools and the only that I'm aware of as "traditional" is UM. Maybe UVA would be?

How about U of Wash? Im interested in applying there, but admittedly do not know that much about their program.

The only reason I have been leaving Berkeley off my list is that I heard that although they have great programs in Arch, Landscape and Planning, the depts are not that cooperative. Is that not entirely true?

Do UVa, UW, or ASU have any street cred?

I'm trying to compile a list of grad programs that aren't outrageously expensive (ivies) but still have really good national, or at least regional, reputations. Anyone have suggestions?

I guess "traditional" might be a slightly misleading word. I was speaking in the context of urban design, and using "traditional" to refer to programs focused on a rigorous exploration of architecture, but with somewhat less consideration for the related disciplines/questions that come into play in urban design. This is certainly not to say that they're not producing interesting and inventive work.

Based on my own extensive research/visits, and the experiences of several friends, I would say there's a real split within schools that on the leading edge over whether/how much to integrate the other urban disciplines. Some schools are devoting a lot of resources to an effort to integrate, others seem to be focused on pushing the envelope within a more "traditional" conception of architectural study and research.

Harvard, MIT and Berkeley are the programs that I think have most successfully diversified their curriculum, specifically by offering 3rd year studios that draw students from multiple tracks, and hiring professors who are on more than one faculty and teach a broad perspective.

No value judgments attached, but definitely something to think about if you're interested in urban design. Afraid I didn't look into UWash during my application process, but I've heard their name come up a bunch on the forum, so I'm sure there's good info kicking around in here.

Im also looking for schools like that JK. So far i've come up with UW, UCLA, CAL, ut, and a few others. I've left some out just because of personal biases/location, but there's plenty out there.

Yes, interesting point john. Would you add Penn to that list of schools which diversify in terms of interdisciplinary work? It seems to me that they do, and a big reason im drawn to their program.

Annagraph, I went and visited Cal, talked to some students and met with some professors that I know through work and some others whose work I admire. The general consensus is that they're moving in a more cooperative direction, and that the crossover experience is there if you seek it out.

One important thing for me is the urban design curriculum and studios, which are accessible to 3rd year students from the various disciplines. Another is that a number of the professors are on more than one faculty (Arch, Landscape, Planning, or Urban Design). Also, the various students share the same building and facilities, if not always the same studio space (they're split up onto 5 or 6 floors). They also have a handful of students at any given time who are doing dual degrees with 2 of the 3 programs. All of this signals a level of integration/cooperation, in my mind. And the crossover was the most important criteria for me in making my decision, so I looked at it pretty hard.

All of that said, MIT is way further along in bringing everyone together, and Harvard's system of shared studio space is incredible and seems to have the desired effect of putting everyone into constant contact with everyone else's work.

If you want to send me an email, I'll be happy to report back this fall and let you know how the level of cooperation looks from the inside.

TheVillain,

I would definitely add Penn to that list. They have great programs in all 3 disciplines, and I had a summer employee last year who was in her 2nd year of the Landscape program who was loving it. She was definitely aiming for urban design as her end goal, and said that the cooperation between the programs was good.

I didn't have a chance to visit, though, so I can't really speak to what other students think, or how their studio space is set up...

Thanks for the info. I'm also definitely interested in a program that heavily integrates planning/urban design into their curriculum since I'm doing my undergrad in urban planning.

Harvard is probably the holy grail school I'm going to be applying to (or maybe Columbia. How interdisciplinary is their program?) Berkeley is a top choice of mine (cheap since I'm in state and has an amazing program. Jennifer Wolch, their new dean, kicks ass.) Penn is another college I'm really looking at... do you know of any down or upsides to Penn vs. Berkeley?

Echoing what jk3hl asked... any other programs that are not so expensive that have this emphasis?

Throwing in my last 2 cents, and then I must get to work and stop hanging out on the forums.

I have two close friends who are/were in the Columbia MArch program (1 just finished 1st year, 1 just graduated), and they both said in no uncertain terms that the Arch students and the Planning students never talk, much less work together. This was corroborated by an MUP student who did an internship at the organization I work for, who said that the two groups never come into much contact except at the end-of-year show.

All together, it would appear that the planning and architecture departments are somewhere between total disinterest in one another, and being openly antagonistic. Sad, because I would have loved to go to Columbia and not have to leave NYC...

I think I read somewhere on these boards that Berkeley has a great undergrad program, but a lacklustre graduate school... was that a complete crackpot's comment, or does anyone agree?

Thanks for all the feedback guys.

I'd love to hear more about what people think of Princeton. My girlfriend is studying in another dept there so I've been able to visit and go to a few visiting lectures. I also get just a generally good feeling--work is rigorous but students seem pretty well taken care of. I know it's reputation is really history/theory heavy, but does anyone know anything else about its rep? Besides being seemingly impossible to get into.

I've heard awesome things about UVA from students there--great collaboration and studio life. And of course there landscape program is also top-notch.

My list seems to be growing and growing. Applications are going to be overwhelming, which is an understatement.

Princeton is the school at the top of my list too...I visited last year, and just has an amazing feel and seems like a great fit for me. However, they accepted 6% last year. Its almost not worth it to apply there.

Villain: I think we all should apply to one school we think might be out of reach. We honestly never know what they are looking for. Think of it this way also: The same as we want an amazing school to go to, it's their job to provide an amazing place for us to learn so they have to choose applicants who will get the most out of their program. Make a great case for how you would totally soak up all that they have to offer & contribute to their school. If it's your dream school, just apply, cuz what if you do get in?