Hello all! I am a grade 11 student who has been wanting to go into Waterloo Architecture for quite a while. Since the beginning, my mind was more preoccupied with creating a strong portfolio and I figured my marks would remain as high as it always was.
However, with a recent series of misfortune and terribly low marks, I am worried about making the first cut for admissions. With a current semester 1 average of 84% in grade 11 and a Grade 12 Advanced Functions mark of exactly 70% (I fast tracked my math), I am concerned about making it in. I barely meet the minimum mark for advanced functions. With an average of, let's say 85%, what do you think are my chances of making it to the portfolio interview stage?
And my question is, if I retake a course, how will my chance for making it to the interview stage be affected? And how far will my grade 11 course marks be looked into?
Thank you and I would really appreciate all the help I could get :)
Stephanie Braconnier
Feb 18, 16 10:24 am
Why the pressure to get in to Waterloo right this instant? Take a gap year and travel. You'll have a chance to redo your math course if you're that worried about your marks.
Taking the time to react to your passions as opposed to reacting to pressure will give you much-needed perspective and may help you direct your focus within the field of design.
MinimalCrazy
Feb 18, 16 2:58 pm
Why are you so stressed about waterloo architecture?
I have friends who went to Waterloo, Carleton and Ryerson, all have came out to be very good at what they do. I have been to countless interviews and often employers say there is no longer difference between Waterloo & Ryerson nowadays (Carleton has their own distinct style). At the end of the day it doesn't really matter which school you go to. Just do your best, get the highest marks you can, and never stop learning, researching, and practicing. Retaking a course to get a higher mark is fine (in your case, highly suggested for Gr12 Adv functions. I was in the same boat with 70 and retook to get 90) as long as you don't have to stay an extra year (it is not worth the time as you have many years to go before you can be an architect in this country...). If your portfolio demonstrates a high level of creativity and visual communication, schools will want to interview you (as long as your marks are 80+). Waterloo is good because they pay many firms in the city to hire their students, so it is much easier to get a co-op job, however if you are good enough you can find your own. If waterloo doesn't interview you based on marks, then whatever. There will be other schools which suit you and will not be so judgmental on a meaningless number.
Non Sequitur
Feb 18, 16 3:15 pm
Waterloo is light-years above all other Canadian schools for its undergrad program and Carleton has fallen very far from where it was just a few years ago.
The unfortunate thing for Waterloo applicants is that the cut-off average is rather high with math a priority due to the heavy front-loading of structures classes. Best to spread your applications around and test out the other schools.
MinimalCrazy
Feb 18, 16 5:24 pm
@non Sequitur, I would like to see some reports/facts for your claims. I know many people who turned out to be very good from all of those schools, and very bad students from all of those schools as well. The same could be said for any school really. I have seen very good students go to Yale, Harvard, UofT and terrible architects as well coming from those schools. What makes Waterloo light years ahead? Is it the so called "rep". Because I'm convinced rep does not matter in our professional due to the additional information of portfolios.
Non Sequitur
Feb 18, 16 5:55 pm
you're right, reputation or simply put, the name on your degrees means nothing. The difference is Waterloo prepares it's students in undergrad to work in offices and most: not all but a vast majority know how to put complicated drawing packages and construction details after 4th year.
On the other side, I've seen very poor performances out of the other schools and the final reviews I attend as a guest are weak.
cecyliyay
Feb 18, 16 8:08 pm
I'm currently in my final year at Waterloo Architecture, so my experience with this goes back to 5 years ago, but here are my two cents.
I've been involved with interviews and information sessions, and from what I've seen, 85% average is decent, but you'd want to boost that math mark up (to 80 ish) if you can in grade 12, since everyone seems to have great grades these days. I don't remember if it's required to submit a resume of some kind along with transcripts, but if you're outstanding in some other aspect, like leadership, and you write your mini paragraphs explaining why you want to go to Waterloo really well, that's actually more important. In addition, how are your physics grades? The structures classes are more physics than math, so I'd assume if you're great at physics that's a big plus.
accesskb
Feb 18, 16 9:24 pm
I hear Waterloo is highly rated due to their co-op program, iconography course and term in Rome. That doesn't mean every student who graduates from Waterloo turns out better than those from other schools. There are a lots incompetent students from that school. If anything, students from other school push themselves harder thinking they weren't accepted into the 'best' school.
MinimalCrazy
Feb 19, 16 4:59 am
@Non Sequitur, I believe your comment has some merit. I was trying to explain to OP that they shouldn't stress about whether they can get in to waterloo or not because it isn't the end if you can't. You can still accomplish many great works regardless of what school you go to. I argue that Ryerson students can create the same quality of construction details and packages as Waterloo students, if not better (as Ryerson is heavily technical based...). However creativity wise, I believe Waterloo and Carleton produces much more creative students vs Ryerson.
I believe this theory explains very well regarding these perceptions on which school is better. On average if you take a group of 50 students from each school, I believe Waterloo has a better average group of well-rounded students. However, if you take about 2-10 of the best students from each, it is roughly equivalent. I believe all three schools produce good talent, but it is true Waterloo produces a higher quantity of them (thus its more reliable for firms and gets them priority for co-op positions). Perhaps it is the strict admission requirements of Waterloo... therefore many students are naturally hard working and constantly push themselves to the limit. So therefore, I have to disagree with your comment that Waterloo is light years ahead, as many great students come out of other undergraduate programs in Canada.
Non Sequitur
Feb 19, 16 6:52 am
Taking the top few students of one school for comparison is not a fair example; regardless of school, these students will do well anyways. From what I've seen both while in school and it the last 7 years as a licensed architect is that the majority of the students from waterloo's undergrad and much better prepared to enter in the working world. I have not yet seen the same results from the other
Ontario schools.
MinimalCrazy
Feb 19, 16 1:59 pm
Why would it be not fair to compare the best students? These students have become who they are because of the school they went to. If they weren't nourished in this system, there is a chance they wouldn't have become who they are. It's interesting you say this, I wonder if your information is just outdated as the other Ontario schools have had no influence vs Waterloo 7 years ago. Several people I know including myself received feedback from top architecture firms in Ontario within the last two months. All of the firms were quite impressed and they said the works were now the same as Waterloo. Some firms hired only waterloo students but started to change their hiring practices after they've seen the gap close. I wouldn't fault you if your knowledge was based on the last 7 years as the gap has drastically closed within recent years. I believe a more fair evaluation would be the students coming out within the last 2 years.
Non Sequitur
Feb 19, 16 3:02 pm
My experience is that the top 10% of the students from the other programs are equal to about the top half of Waterloo. I've seen plenty of modern-day work from all the Canadian schools and I'm not convinced by your arguments.
But then again, the name is just a label; it is the quality and professional competence of the graduate that is important. I find that Waterloo is still far ahead of the curb in the latter of these and this is what I value.
I will grant you that R.U has evolved to be a respectable school but I am quite sadden to say that Carleton's recent 3-way split of the undergrad and exodus of staff has caused the previously strong & design heavy BAS to crumble.
MinimalCrazy
Feb 19, 16 5:05 pm
I believe your comment is an accurate representation of the current three schools. Your initial comment of Waterloo being light years ahead just caught my attention. I just wanted to positively encourage OP as I have seen living proof of select individuals (from R.U. & Carleton) significantly better than 99% of students from Waterloo, and it isn't the end if you can't get in. You just have to work even harder to prove yourself.
accesskb
Feb 23, 16 2:28 am
One thing for sure, Waterloo faculty seems to be invited to the Venice Bienniale to exhibit very often.
Best graduates I have ever hired all came from Waterloo, not planned more fluke but I think it says a lot about working through a co-op type arrangement.
Stephanie Braconnier
Feb 25, 16 10:10 am
It's hilarious to see this argument about which Canadian school is better, when those two schools don't even figure on anyone else's radar - rankings or otherwise.
(All) Canadian schools produce mediocre results. That's why our cities and buildings therein look so mediocre. Being able to get a job in Toronto after graduation is not the be-all, end-all of architectural creativity.
Hello all! I am a grade 11 student who has been wanting to go into Waterloo Architecture for quite a while. Since the beginning, my mind was more preoccupied with creating a strong portfolio and I figured my marks would remain as high as it always was.
However, with a recent series of misfortune and terribly low marks, I am worried about making the first cut for admissions. With a current semester 1 average of 84% in grade 11 and a Grade 12 Advanced Functions mark of exactly 70% (I fast tracked my math), I am concerned about making it in. I barely meet the minimum mark for advanced functions. With an average of, let's say 85%, what do you think are my chances of making it to the portfolio interview stage?
And my question is, if I retake a course, how will my chance for making it to the interview stage be affected? And how far will my grade 11 course marks be looked into?
Thank you and I would really appreciate all the help I could get :)
Why the pressure to get in to Waterloo right this instant? Take a gap year and travel. You'll have a chance to redo your math course if you're that worried about your marks.
Taking the time to react to your passions as opposed to reacting to pressure will give you much-needed perspective and may help you direct your focus within the field of design.
Why are you so stressed about waterloo architecture?
I have friends who went to Waterloo, Carleton and Ryerson, all have came out to be very good at what they do. I have been to countless interviews and often employers say there is no longer difference between Waterloo & Ryerson nowadays (Carleton has their own distinct style). At the end of the day it doesn't really matter which school you go to. Just do your best, get the highest marks you can, and never stop learning, researching, and practicing. Retaking a course to get a higher mark is fine (in your case, highly suggested for Gr12 Adv functions. I was in the same boat with 70 and retook to get 90) as long as you don't have to stay an extra year (it is not worth the time as you have many years to go before you can be an architect in this country...). If your portfolio demonstrates a high level of creativity and visual communication, schools will want to interview you (as long as your marks are 80+). Waterloo is good because they pay many firms in the city to hire their students, so it is much easier to get a co-op job, however if you are good enough you can find your own. If waterloo doesn't interview you based on marks, then whatever. There will be other schools which suit you and will not be so judgmental on a meaningless number.
Waterloo is light-years above all other Canadian schools for its undergrad program and Carleton has fallen very far from where it was just a few years ago.
The unfortunate thing for Waterloo applicants is that the cut-off average is rather high with math a priority due to the heavy front-loading of structures classes. Best to spread your applications around and test out the other schools.
@non Sequitur, I would like to see some reports/facts for your claims. I know many people who turned out to be very good from all of those schools, and very bad students from all of those schools as well. The same could be said for any school really. I have seen very good students go to Yale, Harvard, UofT and terrible architects as well coming from those schools. What makes Waterloo light years ahead? Is it the so called "rep". Because I'm convinced rep does not matter in our professional due to the additional information of portfolios.
you're right, reputation or simply put, the name on your degrees means nothing. The difference is Waterloo prepares it's students in undergrad to work in offices and most: not all but a vast majority know how to put complicated drawing packages and construction details after 4th year.
On the other side, I've seen very poor performances out of the other schools and the final reviews I attend as a guest are weak.
I'm currently in my final year at Waterloo Architecture, so my experience with this goes back to 5 years ago, but here are my two cents.
I've been involved with interviews and information sessions, and from what I've seen, 85% average is decent, but you'd want to boost that math mark up (to 80 ish) if you can in grade 12, since everyone seems to have great grades these days. I don't remember if it's required to submit a resume of some kind along with transcripts, but if you're outstanding in some other aspect, like leadership, and you write your mini paragraphs explaining why you want to go to Waterloo really well, that's actually more important. In addition, how are your physics grades? The structures classes are more physics than math, so I'd assume if you're great at physics that's a big plus.
I hear Waterloo is highly rated due to their co-op program, iconography course and term in Rome. That doesn't mean every student who graduates from Waterloo turns out better than those from other schools. There are a lots incompetent students from that school. If anything, students from other school push themselves harder thinking they weren't accepted into the 'best' school.
@Non Sequitur, I believe your comment has some merit. I was trying to explain to OP that they shouldn't stress about whether they can get in to waterloo or not because it isn't the end if you can't. You can still accomplish many great works regardless of what school you go to. I argue that Ryerson students can create the same quality of construction details and packages as Waterloo students, if not better (as Ryerson is heavily technical based...). However creativity wise, I believe Waterloo and Carleton produces much more creative students vs Ryerson.
I believe this theory explains very well regarding these perceptions on which school is better. On average if you take a group of 50 students from each school, I believe Waterloo has a better average group of well-rounded students. However, if you take about 2-10 of the best students from each, it is roughly equivalent. I believe all three schools produce good talent, but it is true Waterloo produces a higher quantity of them (thus its more reliable for firms and gets them priority for co-op positions). Perhaps it is the strict admission requirements of Waterloo... therefore many students are naturally hard working and constantly push themselves to the limit. So therefore, I have to disagree with your comment that Waterloo is light years ahead, as many great students come out of other undergraduate programs in Canada.
Taking the top few students of one school for comparison is not a fair example; regardless of school, these students will do well anyways. From what I've seen both while in school and it the last 7 years as a licensed architect is that the majority of the students from waterloo's undergrad and much better prepared to enter in the working world. I have not yet seen the same results from the other
Ontario schools.
Why would it be not fair to compare the best students? These students have become who they are because of the school they went to. If they weren't nourished in this system, there is a chance they wouldn't have become who they are. It's interesting you say this, I wonder if your information is just outdated as the other Ontario schools have had no influence vs Waterloo 7 years ago. Several people I know including myself received feedback from top architecture firms in Ontario within the last two months. All of the firms were quite impressed and they said the works were now the same as Waterloo. Some firms hired only waterloo students but started to change their hiring practices after they've seen the gap close. I wouldn't fault you if your knowledge was based on the last 7 years as the gap has drastically closed within recent years. I believe a more fair evaluation would be the students coming out within the last 2 years.
My experience is that the top 10% of the students from the other programs are equal to about the top half of Waterloo. I've seen plenty of modern-day work from all the Canadian schools and I'm not convinced by your arguments.
But then again, the name is just a label; it is the quality and professional competence of the graduate that is important. I find that Waterloo is still far ahead of the curb in the latter of these and this is what I value.
I will grant you that R.U has evolved to be a respectable school but I am quite sadden to say that Carleton's recent 3-way split of the undergrad and exodus of staff has caused the previously strong & design heavy BAS to crumble.
I believe your comment is an accurate representation of the current three schools. Your initial comment of Waterloo being light years ahead just caught my attention. I just wanted to positively encourage OP as I have seen living proof of select individuals (from R.U. & Carleton) significantly better than 99% of students from Waterloo, and it isn't the end if you can't get in. You just have to work even harder to prove yourself.
One thing for sure, Waterloo faculty seems to be invited to the Venice Bienniale to exhibit very often.
http://www.archdaily.com/782447/the-evidence-room?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=56cbc0a904d30107db459729&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook
Best graduates I have ever hired all came from Waterloo, not planned more fluke but I think it says a lot about working through a co-op type arrangement.
It's hilarious to see this argument about which Canadian school is better, when those two schools don't even figure on anyone else's radar - rankings or otherwise.
(All) Canadian schools produce mediocre results. That's why our cities and buildings therein look so mediocre. Being able to get a job in Toronto after graduation is not the be-all, end-all of architectural creativity.