my 2 cents after meeting several grads of A&M, Clemson and GT at various conferences and interviews - A&M and Clemson seem to be the only 2 schools truly "specializing" in a HC-design/curriculm degree - I dont know enough about GT to comment - A&M grads seemed more research-based where the Clemson guys seemed more practice-based - both schools seem to crank out year after year of great students who seem serious about HC design. The A&M faculty that I met seem quite passionate about the healthcare design classes - but I wouldn't want to spend significant time in College Station at A&M either (but Austin and Dallas are in driving range).

Cajun, are you involved in the healthcare field? I know that A&M only offer a certificate, while Clemson actually offers an MArch , an MS and a Phd in those routes. However, A&M has stronger faculty. I don't get it. Its quite the riddle.

A&M's M.Arch program has been making some major improvements, and is only 1 hour from Houston. their lecture series this year was impressive, and their resources are vast. plus i believe their alumni network is very strong. And it's cheap (for instaters).

p.s.
Jake-
A&M offers an M.Arch with a cert in healthcare. is that what you mean?

No, I mean they only offer a certificate program.

Clemson offers a Masters of Architecture in Health that is 2-3 years I believe.

Tx A&M offers a 1 year certificate. What good is a certificate?
I don't know if it means anything, but their program is on "health & aging". While it sounds like the others is on a broader scope of Healthcare.

It seems as if GTech does a certificate too.

Jake - invovled in healthcare (practice, not academic) - I do not know the differences between Clemson's and A&M's degree programs, only that both program's grads are routinely impressive and seem to be snatched up each year by the big HC design firms across the country.

I would also agree with applepop that A&M seems to have HC grads EVERYWHERE and there faculty seems to be tremendously connected.

Jake - invovled in healthcare (practice, not academic) - I do not know the differences between Clemson's and A&M's degree programs, only that both program's grads are routinely impressive and seem to be snatched up each year by the big HC design firms across the country.

I would also agree with applepop that A&M seems to have HC grads EVERYWHERE and their faculty seems to be tremendously connected.

I visited Clemson last year and did not enjoy the area. Students seemed to know what they were doing, faculty was non-responsive after several inquiring e-mails, and unavailable in person. From my one day visit I gathered that the program is 'loosely organized.' You can, of course, specialize in healthcare design pretty much anywhere, and I have been offered several jobs in leading healthcare firms because of an undergraduate thesis that specialized in evidence-based-design (where a lot of HC firms are headed these days). Good luck!

loremipsum:
Where did you do your undergrad?

Does taking 1 studio revolving around healthcare, or hospital, clinic, design, hospital planning, value more than a year or 2 years worth of a degree that specializes in it?


I agree with you on the clemson matter. I sent them an email, and it took months to get back to me. That is why I never bothered to proceed with their application.
I guess I value them over Texas right now because of they market themselves better (arch + health program, better website) and because Texas just has that certificate, which to me, seems without value. When I see the word certificate, I think of a training seminar that spans the course of 3 days. I know its stupid to judge a program off their website, but it is a marketing tool none the less. Should I judge a book by its cover?

a certificate in grad school is like a minor in undergrad...

I did my undergrad at UMass Amherst. That is not necessarily a good place to go to pursue health care design, but the program is very flexible and the faculty is highly resourceful and supportive of any specific interests that students may have.

I'm about to enroll at UC Berkeley for my M. Arch which has a similar flexibility and feel to it, and will pursue advanced research in evidence based design. I chose Berkeley in part because of the prominence of their psychology and neuroscience departments and the degree of co-operation between the disciplines within the University.

Well, a minor in undergrad is pretty useless....am I to assume a certificate would also be useless?

A&M is well connected. He's called Kirk Hamilton. I work for a healthcare studio in Houston. I was not previously involved in the healthcare segment of the profession until recently. My previous experience has been in residential and commercial work. I started with this firm as it was the only office hiring.

I had the opportunity to participate in the HIAC conference in which I was able to see what student work was like. Honestly-I was not impressed at all. I sat in on a couple mid reviews going on, and truthfully, it was some of the most discouraging work I have ever seen. Sure, A&M can produce programmers and people that understand space planning, but I believe that ability and an ability to make Architecture are two completely different things.

Additionally, A&M is trying to establish itself as the center for Healthcare Architecture. PhD students engage in "research;" however, of the presentations I listened to, it was more or less a joke. I actually couldn't believe it. PhD candidates analyzed hospitals, clinics, retirement homes, etc...and built cases for what A&M calls "Evidence Based Design." It's their new religion it seems. More or less, they want to be able to quantify scenarios so that patient outcome only get better and better. For instance-one PhD presentation talked about research done that looked at how natural light affects staff as well as patient experience. I'm not saying that this isn't a worthy thing to consider. Heck, Alvar Aalto even achieved that with his hospital, but the length the school goes to in hopes to quantify it is a bit ridiculous. Sorry, it isn't an exact science.

Another presentation researched walking distances for retired individuals in nursing/retirement centers. He was trying to quantify the type of experience an individual might have as they walk throughout the facility and campus in hopes to prove what experiences are better than others. I'm sorry-it was all a bit absurd.

ichweiB

You really aren't making a strong case FOR TexasA&M.

jake, I applied to the health concentration at Clemson and was waitlisted for it (got into their regular 3 year M.Arch). I've ended up deciding that instead of taking a chance on the waitlist to accept admission at Syracuse. I was very impressed with the faculty in the health concentration at Clemson and was looking forward to going there. But I think there is also a lot to be said for getting the best general arch education and proceeding from there. My thinking is that the key is to get internships with firms working in healthcare and the direction one takes with the thesis.


Also, I felt uncomfortable visiting Clemson (the area around the university, not the architecture department) and feel really good about Syracuse (I'm currently visiting for their open house). But then, I am from New England.

Well, I'm glad someone commented on Clemson finally!

Jgilmo--- I hear what you're saying, but in this economy, no one wants to give an internship in healthcare, without having experience in healthcare to begin with.

I already have a general / generic background in architecture; I'm not applying as a 3 year masters student, but more so as a M.S. or March II.

I just get the feeling that Clemson is a little pretentious with their admissions. That's all. Syracuse is higher ranked school, so it makes me question why Clemson would waitlist you when a much more challenging school (according to DI) would accept you. But then again, I don't want to turn this thread into a topic of admissions.

Oh, did it come across that way? Yeah,I hope to never ever make a strong case for A&M Architecture. I think the school should actually rename itself...maybe something more aligned with construction management, but to suggest the notion of Design, to me, seems a bit misleading.

Just found out UIC does not have sufficient funds and will not be holding their post professional healthcare program this year. GT's program tooks interesting as it seems to be also tried in with an industrial design approach to heathcare design. It can be an intersting take for a post professional degree i think. i have a B.Arch degree and looking between Texas A &M and GT

wow - that's UIC thing is a shock since chicago is a huge health care place!

Is the UIC program a new one and therefore doesn't have the sufficient funds to keep running?

Is tis fairly new, they had it running i know that, however this year they are not holding it for the incomming class. All the applicants are getting letters.

SocialArchi --- How did you find out about the news that UIC lost funding for that program?

i applied there and contacted the program coodinator. if u applied there they should be sending out an offical letter to u.

There has to be more to that story-uic is starting a critical theory program in sept so the funding story is the 'official spin '

Just got off the waitlist for clemson's arch+health!

Any thoughts on this 2 year program as a post-professonal degree? (i already have my professional B. Arch.)

Is the M.S. degree Rusty? How was the process when you communicated with them? Did you find them easy to deal with? abrasive or unresponsive? ANy inside info would help. It seems more people post about Texas AM then aything else.

jake,

I have found working with clemson to be much easier than the other schools i have applied and been accepted to. They actually pick up their phones, return emails, voicemails, etc.

I would be doing the 2 year M. Arch + Health, which would be another professional arch degree for me - I fear this to be a bit redundant.

The Health aspect seems to be very focused though, and hopefully so would the job placement (if that exists anymore in this economy in 2 years) upon graduating.

I hear you Rusty. I was thinking of that 2 year program (having a masters already, although only a first professional) because the 1 year degree is a little too unstructured for my taste

Can any of you guys please tell me the benefits of pursuing a healthcare concentrated masters program? I feel like this is something that sparks my interest, but what is the benefit of focusing only on healthcare in school? Is it more marketable or desirable to firms?
Also, are any of these healthcare programs more selective to get into?
Thank you

Look up the programs on the list, and you can see the facts they provide for making these programs.

Having worked in healthcare, and other sectors, I think that college programs that want to specialize in healthcare are pretty much a gimmick, because you will not get the experience you need without having worked out there, just like every other building type.

These specialty programs will only benefit those who have atleast 3 years working in a healthcare office, and are sure that it is the only thing they want to persue, further specializing within their chosen building type.

I've worked with graduates from all the colleges mentioned and I wont say anything because i don't have anything positive to express about their knowledge. I will say this the ones that have a vast knowledge are the ones that have been in Healthcare for a long time.

I understand that you people want to a degree or certificate that says you are a Specialist in a particular building type, because the economy is so messed up. So i do sympathize.

I went to a college that you could say was recognized in a certain type of building, and i focused on that building type for almost 2 years, but no one hires you based on just where you graduated from, its more complicated than that.

DisplacedArchitect:

I think the main idea is not to come out of these programs as a specialist, but with particular knowledge of this field.

Lets take a program like Clemson's which has been active, according to the program director, for over 20 years and compare it to a school like Tulane. Clemson's focus on healthcare will expose it's students to topics which are not found at Tulane, or, they are at Tulane but maybe not offered every year, or you would have to seek out on your own faculty who are specialists in that field. On a side note, Clemson does have their students sent out to do a summer internship in an office; its not much, but its more than some other schools do.

I think that firms that specialize in healthcare would rather have a recruit who is more versed in the field than a random student from another program. Neither one of them will be able to jump right away and manage projects, but a student with the healthcare background might have a better foundation to built on, assuming the education they got has taken care of the basic training.

I think the argument you are making is: why take a graduate from a program that specializes in healthcare, straight from grad school, when I can recruit a guy who has been working in healthcare for 5-6 years regardless of the institution?

I agree , you want to take the more experienced guy. That goes without saying regardless of the building type.

But I counter that people are going to apply to the healthcare programs because they want to be in the position to BE that guy with 5-6 years experience, and hope that these programs will help them open some doors to get into that specialization.

I do understand where you are coming from and i think we both agree on certain points, but i have to refute your claim that these colleges are not claiming to be specialty degrees, after all why are they labeling themselves with such titles that show that they are in fact specialists? another thing to consider is where are these special professors coming from? thats right from the field aka the office, and i can guarantee that not all of those teaching are from the "healthcare programs"

As i said before i do understand why you people want to specialize.

jakethesnake - Thanks, but may I ask what website facts you are referring to though?

DisplacedArchitect - I was wondering how being a healthcare specialist in school applies to say, day 1 of a firm in the real world. Based on your experience: Is the new hire any more prepared or better paid when jumping in with a healthcare firm? Or Does someone with a normal degree in architecture match up just as well?

captain a hole - You seem to think HC firms would rather recruit someone with the degree specialty. This makes sense to me, as any sort of job recruitment in this day and age is nice to have.


What i really wonder - Is there a lot more theory or things to learn that a specialized education in healthcare could teach to get you on the fast track towards being worth more to a firm from the very beginning? That seems to be the implied goal: being specialized and worth more in order to make more at the start.

Well srah85,
I should explain something first, in architecture as with any other profession networking and knowing people will land you a job, and right now health care firms are just starting to get management level people from these specialty colleges. So we can conclude that if they see a fellow alumni they will probably hire you, maybe 10 more years from now these specialty colleges will have a monopoly within H.C. arch. offices, but right now i would have to say that the majority of architects in health care are not from these specialty college programs.

To answer your question about who is better prepared on the first day? I would have to say that knowledge of programming in healthcare the specialist architecture grad is better prepared, but the non specialist is also quite capable of putting together a reasonable program,but remember neither of you will be working on programming for quite some years maybe 2 or 3 years after getting employed.

So, by the end of your 2 or 3 years in H.C. arch. you will both have learned just as much as the other knows, if you play your cards right. There is no fast track out here we are all on the same track but some of us have more experience depending on how many different offices you have worked at. So you might be exposed to preliminary design earlier than say at an incorporated office.

I will say that the specialist and non specialist are on equal footing on day one. Remember that neither will be involved in pre disign or programming on day one or even year one or after year 2.

Oh and Nope you will not get payed more than the non specialist just based on the fact that you have a certain specialty degree. Maybe in like 10 years when these specialty degree architects infiltrate most of management that will change.

good luck