The I/II/III usually indicates the number of years to complete the respective program. The particular I/II/III you apply to is determined by the undergraduate education you have.

You will have to contact the particular university you intend to apply for to determine which M.Arch program you are qualified for.

MArch I means it's a professional degree program for people who do not have an architecture background, typically a four-year undergrad degree in some other field, or a four-year Bachelor's of Science in Architecture. Duration is usually three years, and you are eligible to begin IDP upon completion and eventually sit your licensing exam.

MArch II means it's a post-professional degree program for people who have a BArch. Duration is one to one and a half years.

I've never heard of an MArch III.

The NAAB.org website discusses all of this in great detail, and professional MArch degrees MUST be accredited by them to be worthwhile at all.

thank you for the responses... by M.Arch III I ment also a part 3 in UK, but if I understand it correctly in UK part 3 is a professional exam that students may pass after master studies to get accreditation.

M.Arch I isn't really a masters if you think of it from a european context. It's a short bachelor if you already have a bachelor in another field. As you said you were an architectural graduate (of 5 years??), you don't apply for this one. If you have only done three years and have a BSc.Arch or a B.A arch, you apply for this in the states.

M.Arch III is a very rare degree where you come out of high school and do 5 years, get no bachelor and just get a masters in architecture. very rare.


So given your a graduate you choose a masters in the UK or a M.Arch II in the US which is a proper masters.

In terms of accreditation, US and UK are the prob the hardest two to get, but the best. UK qualified architects can sometimes think the rest of europe don't have the same skills as they have as it so much harder to get RIBA compared with other countries, and are always disappointed when they collaborate with foreign architects due to lack of knowledge and incompetence.

A masters in the UK is usually non-professional, therfore has nothing to do with accreditation.

RIBA is a club, not an accrediting body. ARB is the accrediting body in the UK. However as clients and nearly everybody think the RIBA is the the accredited, most architects fork out their membership fee.

j'aime

So you mean knoledge that is given in UK schools doesn't do anything with the future profession, or what? Though I think they are much more creative when the eu schools are more techinical ones like ETH and so on.

Now I'm on the way when I should make a decision on where to go.