Guys - this school stuff is just a bottleneck check valve to thin the heard entering the profession. You just watch them relax the requirements and go back to the 4 year as soon as all my group retires in 10 years and there's not enough Gen-Xers and Millennial to replaces them. Well, assuming there's work to actually do LOL.

Jack, the schools have the professions by the short hairs. They aren't going back anytime soon.

marmkid,

"OTF claiming there is nothing worthwhile about the 4+2 or 4+3 is false though"

I have yet to make that statement but I bet it makes it easier to shoot down my arguments when you get to make them up eh?

When there's not enough architects around then the profession will have the schools by the curlys. The inflation of school requirements has corresponded with a tremendous rise in this countries wealth and population entering the work force. A rise of scarcity of all types, money, materials and workers will certainly lead to a culling of the professionals who cant perform and / or the education systems can or cant deliver the professionals needed, at a price they are willing to do it for. Pretty basic supply and demand stuff.

"Throwing money at higher education will never bring more money to the professionals in this field. Because you are not required to have these degrees in the first place, nor is there any actual benifit, educational wise, equivelant to the 2-3 extra years of schooling."

This is false

There can be benefit, education wise and profession wise, if you want there to be

Is it required?
Of course not

But there can be benefits

To answer the original poster's question, yes jobs and opportunities will be SEVERELY limited if you hold an unaccredited degree. If anyone can argue that, please do.

If you reside in a state that allows a 4 yr. degree to sit for licensure, and you plan on staying there, your in luck. If you want NCARB certification you might not get it. However, you can always get reciprocity via another state's professional licensure dept. They dont say hey your not NCARB certified so we dont believe your qualified. They may make you take a test, at least they used to anyways. I think a lic 4 year architect can become NCARB certified after a certain number of years though and then start getting reciprocity that way to. All in all Id move to a 4 year state.

I don't think you guys are taking into consideration the topic of location, My state has ZERO 5 year Barch programs.I am available the choice of 4+2 or 4+3 to pay IN-STATE tuition. For those who are saying get a Barch and only a Barch and it will be cheaper are not using your brains. I would either lose a year gaining in-state residency by moving to a state with a Barch program, which the point your making would be bad because I would lose "valuable working time", OR I would have to pay high out-of-state tuition fees to start now, which would just be as bad as staying in state and doing a 4+2. Chew on that....

where do you want to end up and start your career?
If it is where you are now, and you have no 5 year programs available, that seems like it should make your decision easier

Does the In-State 4+2 where you are have the option for the 2 to be there?
I had to go to a different school to get my M.Arch, which luckily enough for me ended up being in-state



But again, to answer your original question, i think it is safe to say you need to plan on doing a 4+2 if you go that route
Just a 4 year degree will, like was said before, severely limit your career path

I'm still sticking to my point that you should do a 4+2 or 4+3 and major in something outside of architecture in your 4-year track. You know, get something that you can really use or you feel really interested in.

I think my state only has two B.Arch programs. One is in a shitty town at a really nice state school. One is in shitty part of a city at a really nice private school. The total cost of going state is about 13k a year. The total cost of going to private is about 38k a year.

No thanks!

My alma mater use to have an architectural studies/technology program a long time ago but it seems that program was scrapped my first semester going (apparently no one had enrolled in classes for the program). I really should have declared that as my major because they would have had to keep the program open.

I got told by someone in the art department when I had asked why they closed the program was that, "they couldnt imagine the program going anywhere with the academic state of the field and they had no one wanting to commit to keep the program open."

I feel like sometimes architecture is desperately using education to garner validation in a century of uncertain times, changing cultures and unnerving unwinding of value systems.

---0----,

Your state has failed you.
Your states educational system has failed you.
Your future field, if architecture, has failed you.
Chew on that.

At some point Architecture and Architecture school will mean two different things. Christ they cant even stick with a college plan people understand. The Dentists are laughing their balls off at us. I know, because Im doing a vacation home for one right now.

I wouldn't mind practicing in my current state, The school does have a 2 year option if you do there 4 yr degree in arch studies. I kind of always new I was not going for a Barch as none are in my state, I just wanted to know if a 4 year was enough or after getting the 4 year should the Masters be seeked. Both schools that have the 4+2 here are public, I live in Seattle, I got my options of UW or WSU.

Orochi, I am definitely considering possibly doing a 4 yr in something else. masters are pretty damn competitve and if I ended up not getting in I'd like to atleast have a bachelors in something useful becuase most people are saying 4 yr arch degree isnt very useful.

I would meet with an advisor at each school and ask them about it

Some schools, it kind of gives you the inside track to being accepted into the M.Arch, if you did the 4-year there
Others, it might not
I am on the East coast, so i dont know much about those schools, but if you say they are very competitive, it makes sense, like you said, to have a degree in something else useful

The 4 year by itself really doesnt do much
Though a lot of places, getting accepted into the M.Arch program really has a lot to do with your portfolio
So that is one thing the 4 year will do for you that will be a leg up on those not coming from architecture

sorry on the fence, maybe on your next birthday, huh.

0,
My experience could be pretty pertinent to you. I'm from Washington State, grew up in Pullman (wazzuland) and went to UW. A prof at WSU got me interested in architecture. I know that WSU used to have the 5-year accredited program but it sounds like this has changed?
I've got the 4-year degree from UW and went an extra year for construction management. With WSU, you used to go right into architecture while at UW you go two years doing general stuff and then apply for years three and four. During my first two years, I took a course load that satisfied my prereqs for arch but also gave me a good smattering of business, English, & construction management prereqs (in case I didn't make it into architecture). You have to apply at the end of the 2nd year and when I was there, it was pretty competitive, maybe 1/4 of applicants got in, and this to a four year program...
As far as the advantages and disadvantages of the four year program, I think marm & fence come at things from different perspectives but are still right in their own ways.
In Washington, you can become an architect without the masters. In fact, I have a couple friends that are close to becoming accredited. In a way, they took Jack's route of only four years of school and then working towards accreditation. After that, you can absolutely get reciprocity in other states.
I posted on the thread about UW vs. Berkeley what I think about the school so I won't go on about that. I do have a lot of friends in the grad program there and also at WSU so message me if you have any more specific questions. I'll be happy to help as much as possible.
If you go to UW, I really recommend the dual-degree program (even if your profs discourage you from doing it). It will introduce you to a completely different world and allow you a fall-back to make "shit is bananas" (trace?) if you ever need to. Although in this economy nothing is certain.

Thanks intotheloop, I will email you with some questions!

sounds like 6 years it is then.

while jack klompus' desire for the return of days gone by are understandable, i don't think it is worth starting your career 2 steps behind everyone else by stopping after 4 years and an un-accredited degree. times have changed and a 4 year degree will put you at the bottom of the deck in almost every conceivable situation, including earning less compared to others with a masters degree or a b.arch. it will affect your ability to undertake IDP, your ability to move up in many offices, your options to move state, and will otherwise leave you stranded if not lucky and/or highly motivated.

Yes it is possible to overcome those challenges. there are a few tough fellows here who have done so, but why start with limits like that unless you really have to?

in canada it is 4+2 that's it, so i never had to make the decision. tuition in canada is much lower though so that is admittedly not a great hardship. my entire 2 year m.arch cost me about $5000.00 after scholarships. room and board, a wife and a child, was more onerous, but i paid for that by working, which is i suppose the way most adults do it.


speaking of limitations...i moved to London after M.Arch and learned that if i hadn't gone the full architecture for 6 years route i would not have been able to get reciprocity. The "other degree before doing archi-masters" thing would exclude you from the system...not that you are thinking about moving country, but hell i am in my 3rd continent now (i currently run a small office in tokyo) so you never know. i never planned on going anywhere further than Nova Scotia and maybe New York when i was in my 20's either.


btw, my 6 year degree has never felt a waste to me. 4 years was enough to do the job, i admit, but that is not the way the system is set up. shout at the wall all you like it ain't gonna come down anytime soon, so why not enjoy it? personally, i liked school enough to get a phd, but that was paid for by the Japanese government so again money was not an issue...


although it is common on this forum to complain about wages, i would like to add that I have never been paid poorly, except right now - and that is because i am the boss and we are trying to get office off the ground in an incredibly difficult economic climate (and in a language not our own), so its quite fine. it has not caused any horrible difficulties with family or life in general either. 2 kids and wife, decent flat in tokyo, traveled the world, etc etc.

doom and gloom is very trendy and all that but it is hardly as inevitable as some might make it out.

Speaking from the position of someone who did a 4+2, you can do a lot with a 4 year degree. Use that to get your base set of skills. After getting my 4 yr undergrad I went out and worked for 2 years, and saved my money. By that time I had a better idea of what direction I wanted to go and which direction I didn't want to go. At that point I was able to pick a different school which was a perfect compliment to my undergrad experience. Something that pushed in a direction I was interested in and didn't simply repeat my undergrad experience. Because I saved my money and worked as a TA through grad school I was able to come out with very little money owed. I highly recommend this route for the ability to get more specific with your education. Why rush? Personally I enjoyed it.

From my experience the 4+2 is a great way to go, granted my state only had one school and it was the 4+2.
If you are worried about wasting time working in the real world then you can get a 4+2 in 5 years if you really tried. I took the full four years to get my bachelors (along with some minors) and then got the masters in 1 1/2 years.

The more education you get and the more knowledge you obtain then you will be more valuable when you try to get a job. Not to mention to be licensed you must have so many intern hours before you can sit for the exam, so why not take your time in the 4+2 and start obtaining intern hours during your masters.

"Paradox, I think that is the main problem with the 4 year degree. You are so flipant with it, it stands out in your first sentance. Basically the thought is that after 4 years of hard freakin work in school accumulating student loans, denying life in general, ignoring family and freinds, your suggestion is to stay in school for another 2 years accumulating more debt, etc so on and so forth."

I never supported master's degrees for architecture ever. If you ever read my posts in other threads you will see that I'm very much against long years in school and getting over-educated just for the sake of getting a job and even getting a license. My personal opinion is people should be able to take the ARE even they graduated from the 4 year program because in the past it was 4 years anyway.They increased it to 5 years and now we have the graduate degree problem. I assume people will start getting PHDs or DArchs soon..
I'm aware the 4 year degree programs are getting useless and the days after getting licensed over a 4 year degree are not coming back.
The reason I say the 4 year degree gives you options is because you can:

-After you graduate immediately start working and see if architecture is something really what you want to do, if you're not 100% sure when you start to college (because lots of people who graduate from arch programs change careers when they see "real working conditions") and decide if you want to pursue a master's degree. In NY (and I'm in NY) you still have the option to get licensed with a 4 year degree if you work for 5 years. You can either do that depending on your state or choose to go for masters. If you are really sure you want to be an architect right from the start of course the 5 year program is the best but I'm talking about people who are not too sure.

-Go for a degree in other fields such as construction management,interior design,graphic design,industrial design,urban planning,business etc..
One of my friends is getting her construction management degree at Pratt now and her employer is paying most of her tuition. I think my BSAT degree prepared me for these alternative fields so if I decide to get additional education in these fields I won't be so frustrated.

-Just stick with the 4 year degree depending on the field you're in.

It really depends on the school and the individual. For example my school offers a BS in Architectural Technology with concentration in advanced CAD(which is what I did and pretty much useless now) or construction management. My school also offers concentration in Energy Management and Business Administration with BSAT degree. I don't think any of these degrees are useless.

I was also told I could go for the 5 year degree even after graduating from the 4 year BSAT if I wanted to go back and get the professional degree so masters is not the only option after the 4 year program.

I just wish if my education was taken more seriously by the architecture firms because really there isn't much of a difference between the 4 year and the 5 year in the entry level work. In my school the only difference is 30,000$. The folks who pursue the professional degree take 8 more design classes and that's pretty much it and the funny thing is us 4 year BSAT folks had to take this class called "Project Integration" where we not only had to design the building but also do the entire construction documentation set. We started with bubble diagram concepts and specified finishes..it was the most useful class I took in college and the 5 year program didn't have that class.

Parad0xx86 - I think I might be misunderstand your post, but are you saying that some 5 year Barch orograms will take someone with a 4 yr arch degree and give them a prof. degree after one more year? correct me if i am wrong.

Yes it doesn't actually take only 1 year since you have to take all those design classes and you know you can't advance to the next class without passing from the former so it may take between 2-3 years to complete the program but it is not so bad since you will take only 1-2 classes per semester..My school allows it but it doesn't mean all the other schools will allow it too..in the 4 year program we had to complete 136 credits, in the 5th year it is about 166 or something like that..

But of course you still have to have the required gpa and your portfolio has to be approved by the jury.

0,

I not going to persuade you either way, but just tell you a quick version of my realizations and path so far in architecture. I graduated in 2005 with a 4 year degree in Architectural Enginnering. I then found a job at an architectural firm (doing exactly the same thing as others WITH accredited degrees, so it is possible). While in school, I did have an interest in pursuing a MArch degree and realized after a year of working that it had the possiblities for me to eventually teach, get licensed, and establish my own firm. And while in desperate times such as these, you always have a license to fall back on. I also realized due to non accredited degree, when interviewing at some firms I was seen more as a CAD monkey than anything else. So in short I did go back to school and get my Masters of Architecture. I found that my previous education and work experience helped me greatly when designing. I also realized no matter how bad the crits were or how hard I worked, I knew I could make it in the Architecture profession as I had proved that to myself while working. So my total education in years is 3+2.5. My costs were: 4 year degree was 60k and my grad was 65k. I finished the 4 year in 3 and transfered in to the MArch with advanced standing in all of the techincal courses which then required me to take a minor. So I choose CIS, Computer Information Systems. Which now has enabled me to do freelance webdesign as getting a job in the architecture profession is very difficult. I hope by telling you my path, it may help you with yours. Best of Luck in your decisions!

Andy

"I also realized due to non accredited degree, when interviewing at some firms I was seen more as a CAD monkey than anything else."

I think this is probably a very typical reaction during interviews if you only have a 4 year degree

fair or not, i think it is typical

for no other reason than they can justify a lower starting salary for you