Hello everyone. I have a question regarding graduate school admissions in some architecture programs that I am interested in. First off, I am a junior Civil Engineering/Architecture major in an ivy league and would like to apply to MIT MArch and potentially GSD, AA and UCL/Bartlett. My GPA is really not that strong, sitting somewhere between ~2.7-2.8, mostly because of some engineering classes that killed me and because of terrible curves. However, all of my architecture courses are A-/A and a few B's. I will just take experience and internships out of the equation since the question is with regards to grades only. Assuming this trend continues for the rest of my two years in college and I end up with 2.8 graduating GPA, how relevant will this grade be for architecture grad programs, given the success in all of my architecture classes but the underperformance in my engineering classes (mathematics, statics, steel design etc.) which are solely responsible for my overall bad gpa? How important will it be next to strong rec letters (potentially from alums from said colleges), a decent portfolio and ample work experience?
Finally, my plan is to take a couple years off after graduation to seek employment opportunities and such. How would that work in terms of grad school admissions and the bad gpa I might carry from undergrad?
thompson's gazelle
Nov 8, 15 7:35 pm
You can't just assume you're going to graduate with a 2.8 GPA. Do whatever you can to get at least a 3.0. I've heard of a lot of stories who got in with a bad GPA (below 3.0), but have met only few. Professors on the admissions board tell us that GPA and GRE doesn't really matter, but who knows, it's better to put yourself on safer ground in my opinion.
I went to one of the schools you mentioned above, but professional experience didn't seem to stand out as a determinant factor for getting into the program. There were as many students who came straight from undergrad as people who had worked in the field anywhere from 2~10+ years. In hindsight though, I do wish I had worked a couple years before getting my masters now that I've been working at an architecture firm--it allows you to simply bring a lot more practical knowledge to the studio environment. Recommendations from alums or previous faculty of the program is always a huge plus.
no_form
Nov 8, 15 11:34 pm
$$$$ talks GPA walks.
placebeyondthesplines
Nov 9, 15 5:27 pm
If I'm on an admissions committee at MIT, I'm looking at a stack of great portfolios and 4.0 GPAs. What's going to make me even bother with someone who did so poorly as an undergrad? You either underperformed or you made horrible decisions to continue in a major you couldn't handle. Either way the implication is you're going to continue doing badly in graduate school, so it's an easy pass.
Volunteer
Nov 9, 15 6:01 pm
I think you will do fine. I had a 2.5 as an undergraduate and years later a 3.8 from a "public ivy". 4.0 to me says the student never stood up and went head to head with an asshole professor, never took time to develop interpersonal skills, and spent far too much time playing the grade game rather than learning anything.
BR.TN
Nov 10, 15 12:45 pm
"If I'm on an admissions committee at MIT, I'm looking at a stack of great portfolios and 4.0 GPAs. What's going to make me even bother with someone who did so poorly as an undergrad?"
placebeyondthesplines, the OP is dual-majoring in Civil E and Arch from an Ivy League school........I've looked at the accepted portfolios and resumes of students who were accepted to the M.Arch there in 2013. VERY few had that type of academic rigor prior to applying. Many went to good/great undergraduate schools, sure, and had good portfolios, but there's something to say about giving credit to the OP. Also, I think one or two of the twenty I saw had 4.0s/3.98s. I assume you meant that as a hyperbole. Almost all had above a 3.5 though.
OP, I had a 2.8 gpa as a junior and I remember my father harping on me that "you can't go to grad school unless you get above a 3.0! and you'll never be an architect if you don't go to grad school!!"
So I got 3.6 + 3.5 the next two semesters and raised my overall to a 3.15. That was a breath of fresh air. But you'll have a more difficult time doing the same since you're at a more elite and competitve university. In any event, some schools focus on your last 60 credits and even take the GPA from that instead, which helps in my case and will help in yours if you have a successful senior year. I believe MIT in particular will look at your physics and calculus grades from your general studies as well.
Poor GPAs are mitigated by superb letters of recommendation, and further mitigated by overly-competent GRE scores. Your writers being alumni of the schools will help tremendously if they're personal friends of someone on the admissions committee or someone who is admired by the admissions committee (like Bill Pederson). But the goal of choosing who writes your letters shouljd be based on how well they know you. For instance, bribing Bill Pedersen to write a letter for you wont be as effective as having a professor from your undergrad who's known you for 2+ years and you've been close enough to talk about your hopes and dreams to.
placebeyondthesplines
Nov 11, 15 4:19 am
It's not just the grades, it's the inability to get off an obviously sinking ship. You're right, civil engineering and architecture are tough to do together, and the OP hasn't had the sense to drop the engineering courses before they dragged him/her into this position. That's embarrassingly poor decision-making. Is he/she going to continue to take on more than he/she can handle in graduate school? Seems likely. Hard pass.
Hello everyone. I have a question regarding graduate school admissions in some architecture programs that I am interested in. First off, I am a junior Civil Engineering/Architecture major in an ivy league and would like to apply to MIT MArch and potentially GSD, AA and UCL/Bartlett. My GPA is really not that strong, sitting somewhere between ~2.7-2.8, mostly because of some engineering classes that killed me and because of terrible curves. However, all of my architecture courses are A-/A and a few B's. I will just take experience and internships out of the equation since the question is with regards to grades only. Assuming this trend continues for the rest of my two years in college and I end up with 2.8 graduating GPA, how relevant will this grade be for architecture grad programs, given the success in all of my architecture classes but the underperformance in my engineering classes (mathematics, statics, steel design etc.) which are solely responsible for my overall bad gpa? How important will it be next to strong rec letters (potentially from alums from said colleges), a decent portfolio and ample work experience?
Finally, my plan is to take a couple years off after graduation to seek employment opportunities and such. How would that work in terms of grad school admissions and the bad gpa I might carry from undergrad?
You can't just assume you're going to graduate with a 2.8 GPA. Do whatever you can to get at least a 3.0. I've heard of a lot of stories who got in with a bad GPA (below 3.0), but have met only few. Professors on the admissions board tell us that GPA and GRE doesn't really matter, but who knows, it's better to put yourself on safer ground in my opinion.
I went to one of the schools you mentioned above, but professional experience didn't seem to stand out as a determinant factor for getting into the program. There were as many students who came straight from undergrad as people who had worked in the field anywhere from 2~10+ years. In hindsight though, I do wish I had worked a couple years before getting my masters now that I've been working at an architecture firm--it allows you to simply bring a lot more practical knowledge to the studio environment. Recommendations from alums or previous faculty of the program is always a huge plus.
$$$$ talks GPA walks.
If I'm on an admissions committee at MIT, I'm looking at a stack of great portfolios and 4.0 GPAs. What's going to make me even bother with someone who did so poorly as an undergrad? You either underperformed or you made horrible decisions to continue in a major you couldn't handle. Either way the implication is you're going to continue doing badly in graduate school, so it's an easy pass.
I think you will do fine. I had a 2.5 as an undergraduate and years later a 3.8 from a "public ivy". 4.0 to me says the student never stood up and went head to head with an asshole professor, never took time to develop interpersonal skills, and spent far too much time playing the grade game rather than learning anything.
"If I'm on an admissions committee at MIT, I'm looking at a stack of great portfolios and 4.0 GPAs. What's going to make me even bother with someone who did so poorly as an undergrad?"
placebeyondthesplines, the OP is dual-majoring in Civil E and Arch from an Ivy League school........I've looked at the accepted portfolios and resumes of students who were accepted to the M.Arch there in 2013. VERY few had that type of academic rigor prior to applying. Many went to good/great undergraduate schools, sure, and had good portfolios, but there's something to say about giving credit to the OP. Also, I think one or two of the twenty I saw had 4.0s/3.98s. I assume you meant that as a hyperbole. Almost all had above a 3.5 though.
OP, I had a 2.8 gpa as a junior and I remember my father harping on me that "you can't go to grad school unless you get above a 3.0! and you'll never be an architect if you don't go to grad school!!"
So I got 3.6 + 3.5 the next two semesters and raised my overall to a 3.15. That was a breath of fresh air. But you'll have a more difficult time doing the same since you're at a more elite and competitve university. In any event, some schools focus on your last 60 credits and even take the GPA from that instead, which helps in my case and will help in yours if you have a successful senior year. I believe MIT in particular will look at your physics and calculus grades from your general studies as well.
Poor GPAs are mitigated by superb letters of recommendation, and further mitigated by overly-competent GRE scores. Your writers being alumni of the schools will help tremendously if they're personal friends of someone on the admissions committee or someone who is admired by the admissions committee (like Bill Pederson). But the goal of choosing who writes your letters shouljd be based on how well they know you. For instance, bribing Bill Pedersen to write a letter for you wont be as effective as having a professor from your undergrad who's known you for 2+ years and you've been close enough to talk about your hopes and dreams to.
It's not just the grades, it's the inability to get off an obviously sinking ship. You're right, civil engineering and architecture are tough to do together, and the OP hasn't had the sense to drop the engineering courses before they dragged him/her into this position. That's embarrassingly poor decision-making. Is he/she going to continue to take on more than he/she can handle in graduate school? Seems likely. Hard pass.