Names matter, of course, but the work is more important. If you go to a top 10 school, people will recognize it and it'll help open doors, but only a little.

Architecture is one of the few professions where you can 'see' the skill and talent someone has, so your portfolio will be far more important than anything.

I have not heard of and don't know anything about the other schools you mentioned, so my naive guess would be that UofU is not much worse than those as far as reputations go (but I really have no idea about any of these).

Your education is the most important part of your training, so just make sure you aren't taking the easy way out. The quality of the profs and students will make all the difference in the world in the development of your skills.

if you felt the need later to get a more high profile degree - do a year degree post professional degree elsewhere after your masters - maybe after practicing a bit - but can be more specialist and more directive - urban, housing, eco, real estate, etc. or perhaps in an area of the country you wish to settle [hope that you plan to live elsewhere than utah!]

always think this is better way anyhow since NAAB MArchs are very prescriptive in the end of the day -

I second that advice, and would just remind you to work your ass of in studio, try and get an internship somewhere cool like Seattle, SF, Vancouver.

People are always impressed with the name of the school but in the end of the day, it's only your level of talent, experience, performance, and personality that matter.

I was just going through my firm's directory and a vast majority of the senior level designers, partners, and principals, came from schools that some would only consider big time sports schools or "party schools" or even schools that that aren't even known for those statistics or any major academic standing. The architecture profession isn't like the law profession where the school and your rank are a big part of where you get placed in a job.

As a matter of fact, I would compare architecture to the MD profession in that you can go to any school and be a doctor and then work wherever you want provided you're completed medical school and residency.

I think law is the only profession where the school rankings matter.

The way I see it, the school names don't travel very far. Other than the ivy's and some of the other "usuals" (you know UCLA, Berkely, Cinci, UTA, whatever else is popular theses days), the name of the school isn't really known outside of the immediate city/region anyways.

My current employer (over-seas) doesn't even know where the University of Manitoba is located, let alone what the school's pedagogy is. I imagine it would be the same for most state-schools.

Ok well heres my other concern about the whole mARCh thing... I was mainly saying that because the UofU has the non accredited Bachelors. Thats pretty much the only reason I was going for the mARCH so that I have an accredited professional degree. So if I were to take another Masters program in a related field, I would not be able to be a licensed and registered architect. I can totally relate to that the school doesn't matter there is just certain people that I've talked to that have graduated and they pretty much think that if you don't go to Pratt or Columbia or Harvard or whatever then you will never make a good name or career for yourself...

It depends on if it is a recognizable name. You get immediate respect when you name schools like Columbia or UCLA, which can open doors. But it still comes back to your work, ultimately.

You have to also consider that these schools have a reputation for a reason. It is not arbitrary, typically the top 10-20 schools have the best faculty and reputations. You can get a good education elsewhere, but don't think that all you get is a name.

I'm guessing you can apply yourself and get a really good education at Utah. You could also go to a place "out east" and spend all your time partying and come out with a mediocre education at best. Any academic institution is what you make of it.

As for names I wouldn't worry. I went to a no-name mid-western state school and haven't ever found opportunity to be lacking because of where my degree is from. I'm continually amazed at the alumni network which branches out to all parts of the country and beyond. Obviously the bulk of the grads work in the nearest metro areas but that applies to any institution. The one benefit you hear about the ivies is the connections but I'm suspect of that as med. mentioned, many higher level architects in major firms came from places some people might overlook. The simple fact is, once you are out there working you'll be known for your work, not where you got your degree from.

I am particularly interested in your question as I had to ask the same one myself. I went to a community college for 2 years and was planning on attending the University of Utah upon completion. I decided to Attend the University of Cincinnati instead and I will be attending UCLA for grad school this fall. I chose to go to Cincinnati for the name as it is more recognized than Utah. Unfortunately I did not investigate sufficiently as I wasn´t sure at the time what exactly I wanted out of architecture school.

I do not regret adding two extra years to my schooling in the least, my regret is in the lack of investigation, turns out cincinnati is overrated and I was not a very good fit at the school. I am going to UCLA not because of its name (as I know there are beginner names out there) but because I feel my interests are very much in line with the program.

As for the University of Utah, I am not particularly impressed with the work I have seen (I visited the school last year) but you may find it fits well. If it turns out your wrong than you can find a better fit for grad school or transfer, just do not worry about the time.

Ted is full of shit btw, I currently live in Mexico City and have lived in LA, New York and Cincinnati. I am originally from Utah and it is fucking awesome. Snowboarding, rock climbing, hiking, mountain biking, all in your backyard.

much love TED. The rest of your advice is good. Just disagree with the Utah criticism.

typo: beginner names should be replace with bigger names

and drew, if you decide to go to Utah and need help finding a place to stay, let me know, I am pretty sure my buddy has an extra room for cheap right next to campus. email me msmit106@yahoo.com

on the subject of big name school (ivy's, u.c.'s, etc.) vs. not, it depends a lot on what you want i guess. if you want to teach, the bigger name schools mean more. likewise, if you want to work for a starchitect or want to work internationally or far away from your school. they'll teach you how those firms like to work and what they appreciate and they'll give you contacts. if you want to work in utah or around there, i'm sure university of utah would work out great.

remember also, that you can always go back to school again if you want the bigger name and this time you can go for a shorter time. i went to harvard and there were plenty of people who came back to get there m.design degree (only 1.5 years) after they had already gotten their master's arch. somewhere else. seems like a good deal.

the big thing to consider that nobody seems to have brought up so far is the tuition. architecture does not pay enough to take on excessive debt. state school's seem like the best deal to me.

i would say that in general, if you are going to do an M Arch, do youre first 2 years where you are comfortable. The ugrad portion of your schooling are likely going to mean less than the grad portion... so... go to ugrad where ever it makes the most sense... by that i mean dont break the bank, go somewhere comfortable so you can truly maximize your output while there... then, if you feel the need to get your MArch at a big name school, if your grades and portfolio are good, you should be able to do so.

I guess, very generally, its the final name on your resume that matters most... U of U for Ugrad and then, say, UCLA (since you mentioned it) for your masters will carry more weight than U of U for ugrad and masters.
Same applies to the b.arch... go to a good b.arch program ( like cinci or iit) and that has more value than a less reputable schools b.arch (and maybe even a less reputable schools MArch)... so... its really the last name that counts...

and i should also state that its the last school on your resume that counts most only till you get your first job... once youve worked for a bit, most employers will look to see who you worked for and how you did... your mArch name or GPA will become largely irrelevant the farther out from school you get... might seem like common sense but its something to keep in mind...

think about where youd like to start your career... do your Ugrad at Utah, and try to get into a masters program in the city or region of your choosing... that seems to be the best course...

and if you decide to do that, make sure you ask them how many grad schools get into the schools you are interested in for grad school. At UF, where I went for undergrad, they had an amazing success rate for helping students get into top grad schools.

Reputations matter, but the quality of the student work is the most revealing. Don't simply assume that if you work hard you can get into anywhere - you need the quality professors to get a quality education.

Personally, I don't think going to U of U is a bad move. But I would keep your options open for grad schools after that...

The U is actually a pretty good school, that is where I got my undergrad degree, and for the most part I am pretty pleased with my education. However, I busted my balls for those two years while in the program.

So I second what lletdownl said in his post. And to add to that, the U of U probably prepared me for grad school better than a lot of other undergrad programs out there. I think a testament to that is the caliber of grad schools that my fellow classmates and I got into. (Yale, MIT, the Polytechnic of Milan, Michigan, Berkeley, UWash, RISD, Columbia, USC...)

Again, you have to work hard, but if you do the U will give you a great education.

I was wondering this same thing, so I am glad to see there is already a thread.

I grew up in UT so I have been thinking of going back there to finish my undergrad.

msmit106, if you are still around... would you mind elaborating on what you didn't like about the student work at U of U? I have not gotten a chance to look at it yet.

The "name" of your school is probably one of the most important (besides your portfolio of course) things to consider. Mainly in consideration if you're going to work/deal with people outside the field of architecture. I've worked with developers before and seen countless times, good portfolios from "no-name school architect" being tossed aside for bad portfolios from "prestigious school architect." *This is usually prevalent when you start to work outside the USA.

School names are just like brand name items. Their is an inherent trust in what people know and have already heard of. For example, if two people with equal portfolio's were applying for the same job - one graduated from the UofU and the other from Columbia. I believe most people would hire the person from Columbia. (Actually I've seen this a lot)

Regardless of where you go, it won't mean anything if you don't apply yourself and take the best of what that school has to offer. Prestigious schools "do" offer more open doors and opportunities but once again it's the person who has to take the initiative to use them.

I don't know if this may help you but currently what I'm doing is I am going to a cheap 5-year B.Arch program (not the best school but within top 10) to save money - a hell of a lot of money in fact. Then for my M. Arch degree apply to a big name school and not feel guilty because I saved so much money in my undergrad education. And since i would already have a B.Arch, my time in the Grad program would be short meaning more money saved.

*Even though a school name is important, you should always choose the school which *FITS* your interest instead of trying to conform the school's philosophy.

I hoped this help. Most of this information is based off my own experience. Sorry for the long read.

That is similar to what I was planning and my reasons for it. I am thinking of finishing my undergrad at the U and then going somewhere else for my M. Arch. Although I was planning to chose based on the best fit program, not the name.

Is the school brandism as prevalent as gotzmlk suggests? I have already had to wade through alot of negative feedback from non-architects in response to being a woman in architecture. If my good portfolio has a chance of being tossed because I don't go ivy then I'm really screwed. :~(

Sorry for hijacking your thread Drew.

Hey so just an update everybody... I did decide to go to the U of Utah undergraduate program. I started about 2 weeks ago and so far I'm really enjoying it. My studio teacher is straight up from France just barely. This is her first semester teaching here so she has a new broad aspect on reviewing and other aspects. archroma you in the program right now? As far as the masters is concerned I'm probably going to keep my options open. My wife is from the east and thinks that I should apply out there as there are more job opportunities as well... We will see in 2 years where I'm at and whats going on...

No Drew, I am not in the program at U of U yet. I would be looking at starting the program next fall.

I was doing a special major program here in Cali with the assumption that I would have to do a 3 year M.Arch but my program was cut due to budget. That and some family problems recently have made returning to UT more attractive.

I also had a similar thought as you. If I would finish a B.Arch or an M.Arch in the same amount of time, why not the M.Arch. I'm a little older than average and have a family, so the demographic difference between B.Arch and M.Arch programs is worth thinking about.

temple is in the process of switching from a b.arch to a bs arch and m.arch program. i think fall next year is the first m.arch class.