Hello! I am new to Archinect so sorry in advance if I have accidentally posted in the wrong section of the forum!
I am currently a freshman at Parsons' BFA for architectural design. I am considering continuing my undergraduate degree elsewhere, and I really like USC and SCI-ARC. I know that most of my courses will probably not transfer over to SCI-ARC. However, among their various pros/cons I would really like some help and advice on what to include in my portfolio when applying. All and any help would be very useful!
While I have researched a lot of SCI-ARC, I am still have many questions about the school. I have heard it creates very abstract design and its very digital. If you have anything you could share about the small school that I may have learned from other threads about it on Archinect, I would greatly appreciate it as well! Thank you.
Driko
Nov 15, 16 5:27 pm
Hi @zac97
I suggest you stay at parsons and complete your BFA in Architectural Design. The main reason i say is because when you transfer to other architecture programs, more likely than not they will make you take their studio design courses. These Studios never transfer.
Sci- Arc will take you another 5 years to complete and at USC you will essentially be a freshman again. So at sci are you will have an accredited professional degree and USC you will not.
Sci- arc 5 years + 1 year parsons.
USC 4 years + 1 year parsons.
Sci- arc is very theoretical and you will explore the newest trends in architecture such as parametric design. I dont know much about USC but i image they follow SCI- arc and UCLA but with a bit more practicality. In my opinion learn skills that are practical vs theoretical.
In architecture, Theory is a bullshit excuse to stay relevant in the university world and i blame schools like sci- arc and harvard for pushing this bullshit. They do this because it is easy to market to kids out of high school, it looks exciting, and the program can gain more research funding (play money for robots). When engineering schools receive funding its because they are trying to develop something that is going to change the world for better. When architecture schools revive funding its because they want to make something look "cool" unless its partnered with material engineering or civil.
I say finish your degree and find your self an internship. you might realize you are either interested in building or design and that can help you choose what school you would like to attend if any at all.
Also, take a look at tuition and cost of living. Dont graduate with more that $20k of debt and if you cant avoid going further in debt.
zac97
Nov 15, 16 8:17 pm
Thank you for your response!
One of the reasons I am thinking of transferring is that I am not too fond of New York City. Additionally, I am from California and my family is back home. In terms of what is also very important to me, I'd like to feel comfortable in the city that I live, and I also value strong family relationships. For these reasons, I am interested in transferring schools, however I am not fully committed yet.
My time here at Parsons is not what I had expected as well. A lot of the students are starting to believe the cost of the school is not worth the education we are receiving, and I agree. The intelligence of the general student body concerns me a tad. In one of my classes, we had to draw orthographics of simple shapes and it concerned me how much people struggled with this. One girl didn't even know how many shapes made up a cube.
To continue, I agree with your ideas on theory. Many of my classes stress the idea of concept, however I think its becoming a tad overdone and we become so focused in making things symbolic or having meaning in everything that it just becomes confusing. Its definitely interesting but I miss using technical skills along with math/science. This also influences the way I think of a BFA in comparison to a B.Arch.
Driko
Nov 16, 16 9:26 am
@zac97
in that case i would shoot for USC but they are private and very expensive. Try UCLA, woodbury, both cal poly schools. Figure out what your cost is going to be and if you sacrificed a year at parsons its not the end of the world but try minimizing your time at school. I just dislike sci - arc because they run more like a business than a school. They have impressive students and faculty but i dont buy it. Although this school might be right down your alley and in that case aim for it and try to minimize the years you will spend there and apply for any scholarship they have.
I went to school at University of Arizona for a year and went back to my home state of Illinois so from experience i know it sucks taking studios over again and spending money on useless classes. one thing i can say though is that it was alot more fun and easier to be in a warmer climate. Going back to Illinois with the cold and the snow made studio projects difficult to manage.
good luck and note that my opinion is only one of many here.
thisisnotmyname
Nov 16, 16 12:56 pm
In my experience, first year studio courses generally transfer from school to school. The basic info they are teaching is usually pretty similar from program to program.
I would definitely recommend looking at other schools in California in addition to SciArc and USC. If you qualify, I think the in-state tuition rates may make some of the public schools a good value.
zac97
Nov 17, 16 11:56 am
Thank you both for your responses, I greatly appreciate it!
@Driko I think I may agree with you. After researching a bit more into Sci-Arc I don't think it is the right fit for me. I'm not interested in the very futuristic themed architecture. Also, I am also uneasy over the idea they do not offer any minors or any other class that is not within the realm of architecture. I am sure architecture is what I want to do and it is what I am passionate about, but branching off and taking electives in other subjects definitely doesn't hurt. To add, after speaking with my admissions counselor at USC, many of my courses will be able to transfer. I don't believe the same applies to Sci-Arc. I also know that I prefer the warmer climate as well, fall in NYC is already much different than what it is in LA.
I was considering UCLA but they're transfer process is very strict. Coming from Parsons, I don't believe they'll accept someone like me. But since you reminded me of it, I'll take another look. I haven't heard much about Woodbury so I'll also look into that as well, thank you.
@thisisnotmyname Yes, my admissions counselor actually had referred me to a USC transfer guide. Long story short, I was able to find Parsons on that website and which courses/credits they'll accept. My counselor had said if I were able to find Parsons and information about which course credits are accepted, it is because it has been done before. Fortunately, I was able to find Parsons so I believe someone has transferred from Parsons to USC.
One of my questions is, which I am awaiting a response from USC, is what sort of work should I be including in my portfolio application? I have not accomplished much work that is based around architecture. I may be overthinking the question, but perhaps the work we apply with right out of high school isn't much different than what one may apply with transferring out of foundation year?
Hello! I am new to Archinect so sorry in advance if I have accidentally posted in the wrong section of the forum!
I am currently a freshman at Parsons' BFA for architectural design. I am considering continuing my undergraduate degree elsewhere, and I really like USC and SCI-ARC. I know that most of my courses will probably not transfer over to SCI-ARC. However, among their various pros/cons I would really like some help and advice on what to include in my portfolio when applying. All and any help would be very useful!
While I have researched a lot of SCI-ARC, I am still have many questions about the school. I have heard it creates very abstract design and its very digital. If you have anything you could share about the small school that I may have learned from other threads about it on Archinect, I would greatly appreciate it as well! Thank you.
Hi @zac97
I suggest you stay at parsons and complete your BFA in Architectural Design. The main reason i say is because when you transfer to other architecture programs, more likely than not they will make you take their studio design courses. These Studios never transfer.
Sci- Arc will take you another 5 years to complete and at USC you will essentially be a freshman again. So at sci are you will have an accredited professional degree and USC you will not.
Sci- arc 5 years + 1 year parsons.
USC 4 years + 1 year parsons.
Sci- arc is very theoretical and you will explore the newest trends in architecture such as parametric design. I dont know much about USC but i image they follow SCI- arc and UCLA but with a bit more practicality. In my opinion learn skills that are practical vs theoretical.
In architecture, Theory is a bullshit excuse to stay relevant in the university world and i blame schools like sci- arc and harvard for pushing this bullshit. They do this because it is easy to market to kids out of high school, it looks exciting, and the program can gain more research funding (play money for robots). When engineering schools receive funding its because they are trying to develop something that is going to change the world for better. When architecture schools revive funding its because they want to make something look "cool" unless its partnered with material engineering or civil.
I say finish your degree and find your self an internship. you might realize you are either interested in building or design and that can help you choose what school you would like to attend if any at all.
Also, take a look at tuition and cost of living. Dont graduate with more that $20k of debt and if you cant avoid going further in debt.
Thank you for your response!
One of the reasons I am thinking of transferring is that I am not too fond of New York City. Additionally, I am from California and my family is back home. In terms of what is also very important to me, I'd like to feel comfortable in the city that I live, and I also value strong family relationships. For these reasons, I am interested in transferring schools, however I am not fully committed yet.
My time here at Parsons is not what I had expected as well. A lot of the students are starting to believe the cost of the school is not worth the education we are receiving, and I agree. The intelligence of the general student body concerns me a tad. In one of my classes, we had to draw orthographics of simple shapes and it concerned me how much people struggled with this. One girl didn't even know how many shapes made up a cube.
To continue, I agree with your ideas on theory. Many of my classes stress the idea of concept, however I think its becoming a tad overdone and we become so focused in making things symbolic or having meaning in everything that it just becomes confusing. Its definitely interesting but I miss using technical skills along with math/science. This also influences the way I think of a BFA in comparison to a B.Arch.
@zac97
in that case i would shoot for USC but they are private and very expensive. Try UCLA, woodbury, both cal poly schools. Figure out what your cost is going to be and if you sacrificed a year at parsons its not the end of the world but try minimizing your time at school. I just dislike sci - arc because they run more like a business than a school. They have impressive students and faculty but i dont buy it. Although this school might be right down your alley and in that case aim for it and try to minimize the years you will spend there and apply for any scholarship they have.
I went to school at University of Arizona for a year and went back to my home state of Illinois so from experience i know it sucks taking studios over again and spending money on useless classes. one thing i can say though is that it was alot more fun and easier to be in a warmer climate. Going back to Illinois with the cold and the snow made studio projects difficult to manage.
good luck and note that my opinion is only one of many here.
In my experience, first year studio courses generally transfer from school to school. The basic info they are teaching is usually pretty similar from program to program.
I would definitely recommend looking at other schools in California in addition to SciArc and USC. If you qualify, I think the in-state tuition rates may make some of the public schools a good value.
Thank you both for your responses, I greatly appreciate it!
@Driko I think I may agree with you. After researching a bit more into Sci-Arc I don't think it is the right fit for me. I'm not interested in the very futuristic themed architecture. Also, I am also uneasy over the idea they do not offer any minors or any other class that is not within the realm of architecture. I am sure architecture is what I want to do and it is what I am passionate about, but branching off and taking electives in other subjects definitely doesn't hurt. To add, after speaking with my admissions counselor at USC, many of my courses will be able to transfer. I don't believe the same applies to Sci-Arc. I also know that I prefer the warmer climate as well, fall in NYC is already much different than what it is in LA.
I was considering UCLA but they're transfer process is very strict. Coming from Parsons, I don't believe they'll accept someone like me. But since you reminded me of it, I'll take another look. I haven't heard much about Woodbury so I'll also look into that as well, thank you.
@thisisnotmyname Yes, my admissions counselor actually had referred me to a USC transfer guide. Long story short, I was able to find Parsons on that website and which courses/credits they'll accept. My counselor had said if I were able to find Parsons and information about which course credits are accepted, it is because it has been done before. Fortunately, I was able to find Parsons so I believe someone has transferred from Parsons to USC.
One of my questions is, which I am awaiting a response from USC, is what sort of work should I be including in my portfolio application? I have not accomplished much work that is based around architecture. I may be overthinking the question, but perhaps the work we apply with right out of high school isn't much different than what one may apply with transferring out of foundation year?