First post here - I'll be beginning a masters program this fall and have a few exciting options to choose from. They're all quite different yet comparably appealing in their respective ways. The time to make a decision is drawing very near, so I could really use some objective feedback. Thanks in advance for your comments!
With no further ado, here's the breakdown:
1) Politecnico di Milano / MSc in Building Architecture
Great partnerships with regional firms (EMBT, BAD., Cloud 9, etc.)
Guaranteed 6-month to 1-year research position following graduation
Guaranteed opportunities to engage in 1:1 buildings and prototypes as a student (past projects are super impressive, see links below)
Highly interdisciplinary (apart from architecture, course features modules on fabrication, parametric design, biology, permaculture, forestry, etc.)
I speak Spanish and want to learn more
Program is housed in a XIX century Catalan maisa (sort of a villa) in Collserola, the world's largest metropolitan park (in addition to the primary campus in the city)
Barcelona is, well, Barcelona
Cons:
Unaccredited degree (fortunately in CO I can attain licensure without a professional degree given I've completed my AXP hours, but still worth considering)
Less-renowned among non-avant-garde circles
Less emphasis on real-world technicalities
I don't speak Catalan (and don't really care to invest much time learning)
3) University of Cambridge / MPhil in Architecture & Urban Design
Pros:
Small student/instructor ratio (plus regular 1 on 1 meetings w/ professors as key part of curriculum)
Well-ranked (8th by QS)
Professionally accredited degree
Extremely well-renowned
Renowned instructors/guest lecturers (Peter Eisenman, Christopher Alexander, Richard Sennett, James Stirling, Peter Clegg, etc.)
Renowned alumni (Christopher Alexander, Peter Eisenman, Peter Clegg, Spencer de Grey, etc.)
Incredible networking opportunities
Amazing research opportunities (course includes a 6-9 month fieldwork period in any location of my choosing related to my thesis)
Somewhat interdisciplinary (course covers both architecture and urban design, but it's also an 'open' university meaning I could attend lectures in any subject and obviously Cambridge has the best lecturers in all sorts of fields - especially science!)
Strong emphasis on academic rigor, i.e. quality and content of work produced over 'glam' factor
Focus on architecture integrated into real-world urban scenarios
Prioritizes the development of each student's individual style
Would set me up well both for professional practice and academia (could likely continue onto a funded PhD if I choose to)
I speak English
Gorgeous campus...duh
College system
Relatively easy to find work after graduation (due to economics, language, visa status, etc.)
Cambridge is, well, Cambridge
Cons:
No scholarships to date (total cost including living expenses would be ~$100k, still cheaper than premier US schools but extremely expensive nonetheless)
Fairly limited workshop facilities (lasers available, but hand-cut models preferred, no 3D printers, CNC's, etc.)
Few opportunities to engage in 1:1 buildings or prototypes as a student
Avoid putting in more than the bare minimum effort
Create the illusion that you're smarter than the average bear
Cons:
Relying on strangers for important life decisions
Receive nothing of worth because of obvious lazy or undecided nature
Likely to return to online strangers for advice and never develop their own ability to make decisions by themselves
Pick the cheapest accredited school and move on with your career. No arch degree is worth the extra money and the value of the school's name quickly disappears once you enter the workplace.
M Salka
May 18, 18 1:52 pm
trolling online posts about graduate school options:
Pros:
Avoid offering any insight of real value
Create the illusion that you're smarter than the average bear
Cons:
Makes you seem like a total ass
Personally I'm not convinced trying to accumulate more information on which to base a decision signals either laziness or indecisiveness, nor that your sarcasm was at all necessary to prelude the small nugget of actual advice you ended with, but I suppose I still appreciate your perspective. Guess opening myself up to sass is part and parcel with leveraging online forums.
Non Sequitur
May 18, 18 1:56 pm
I think you got it. Advice with extra sass makes everyone happy.
M Salka
May 18, 18 2:01 pm
.
archinet
May 18, 18 1:20 pm
Milan bc it is the cheapest.
M Salka
May 18, 18 1:54 pm
Thanks
Hcr20
Jul 28, 18 12:04 pm
what did you decide on in the end?
Volunteer
Jul 28, 18 12:10 pm
Milan. The Italians are alive. The Spanish might be. The English once were, but currently (?).
黄钰昇
Apr 8, 19 2:58 am
I think the most important thing is to decide what kind of research area really interests you. If you interested in history-contextual architecture, go to Polimi. If you want to expirence these avant-garde thing, go to IAAC. If you are strong in academic research, go to Cambrige.
All the three places are good. No worries about the region nor language. Stay focused on your academic interests.
Hi all,
First post here - I'll be beginning a masters program this fall and have a few exciting options to choose from. They're all quite different yet comparably appealing in their respective ways. The time to make a decision is drawing very near, so I could really use some objective feedback. Thanks in advance for your comments!
With no further ado, here's the breakdown:
1) Politecnico di Milano / MSc in Building Architecture
Pros:
Free ride! Yippee!
Well-ranked (9th by QS)
Good workshop facilities
Renowned alumni (Renzo Piano, Aldo Rossi, Geo Ponti, etc.)
Highly technical focus
Large university (40,000+ students)
Accredited professional degree
Milan is a hub of design across industries
Italy is, well, Italy
Cons:
Relatively high student/instructor ratio, i.e. less direct engagement
Not familiar with instructors/guest lecturers
Difficult to find work in country after graduation (due to economics and visa status)
Less research-oriented
Leans more traditional than progressive (conceptually and with regard to technology)
Doesn't emphasize interdisciplinary collaboration (at least not beyond 'politecnical' disciplines, i.e. engineering, architecture & design)
I don't speak Italian (course is in English, but still relevant for networking, socializing, etc.)
Few opportunities to engage in 1:1 buildings or prototypes as a student
Links:
http://www.polinternational.polimi.it/educational-offer/laurea-magistrale-equivalent-to-master-of-science-programmes/architecture-building-architecture/
http://www.architettura.polimi.it/en/lavori/pspa/e12/
2) Institute of Advanced Architecture of Catalonia / MAEB Master in Advanced Ecological Buildings
Pros:
50% Scholarship (best they offer, total reduced cost including living expenses would be ~$30k)
Small student/instructor ratio
Well-renowned among the avant-garde
AMAZING workshop facilities (lasers, 3D printers, 5-axis CNC's, drones, robotics, you name it - largest Fab Lab in Europe!)
Renowned instructors/guest lecturers (Vicente Guallart, Bjarke Ingels, Winny Maas, Enric Ruiz-Geli, etc.)
Great partnerships with regional firms (EMBT, BAD., Cloud 9, etc.)
Guaranteed 6-month to 1-year research position following graduation
Guaranteed opportunities to engage in 1:1 buildings and prototypes as a student (past projects are super impressive, see links below)
Highly interdisciplinary (apart from architecture, course features modules on fabrication, parametric design, biology, permaculture, forestry, etc.)
I speak Spanish and want to learn more
Program is housed in a XIX century Catalan maisa (sort of a villa) in Collserola, the world's largest metropolitan park (in addition to the primary campus in the city)
Barcelona is, well, Barcelona
Cons:
Unaccredited degree (fortunately in CO I can attain licensure without a professional degree given I've completed my AXP hours, but still worth considering)
Less-renowned among non-avant-garde circles
Less emphasis on real-world technicalities
I don't speak Catalan (and don't really care to invest much time learning)
Links:
https://iaac.net/educational-programmes/master-advanced-ecological-buildings/academic-structure/
http://www.fablabhouse.com/en/
https://www.archdaily.com/2749...
3) University of Cambridge / MPhil in Architecture & Urban Design
Pros:
Small student/instructor ratio (plus regular 1 on 1 meetings w/ professors as key part of curriculum)
Well-ranked (8th by QS)
Professionally accredited degree
Extremely well-renowned
Renowned instructors/guest lecturers (Peter Eisenman, Christopher Alexander, Richard Sennett, James Stirling, Peter Clegg, etc.)
Renowned alumni (Christopher Alexander, Peter Eisenman, Peter Clegg, Spencer de Grey, etc.)
Incredible networking opportunities
Amazing research opportunities (course includes a 6-9 month fieldwork period in any location of my choosing related to my thesis)
Somewhat interdisciplinary (course covers both architecture and urban design, but it's also an 'open' university meaning I could attend lectures in any subject and obviously Cambridge has the best lecturers in all sorts of fields - especially science!)
Strong emphasis on academic rigor, i.e. quality and content of work produced over 'glam' factor
Focus on architecture integrated into real-world urban scenarios
Prioritizes the development of each student's individual style
Would set me up well both for professional practice and academia (could likely continue onto a funded PhD if I choose to)
I speak English
Gorgeous campus...duh
College system
Relatively easy to find work after graduation (due to economics, language, visa status, etc.)
Cambridge is, well, Cambridge
Cons:
No scholarships to date (total cost including living expenses would be ~$100k, still cheaper than premier US schools but extremely expensive nonetheless)
Fairly limited workshop facilities (lasers available, but hand-cut models preferred, no 3D printers, CNC's, etc.)
Few opportunities to engage in 1:1 buildings or prototypes as a student
Less avant-garde/progressive
Links:
https://www.arct.cam.ac.uk/admissions/postgraduate/mphil-degree-in-architecture-and-urban-design-maud-arb-riba-pt2
http://cambridge-design-research-studio.com/
Cheers!
posting online about graduate school options:
Pros:
Cons:
Pick the cheapest accredited school and move on with your career. No arch degree is worth the extra money and the value of the school's name quickly disappears once you enter the workplace.
trolling online posts about graduate school options:
Pros:
Cons:
Personally I'm not convinced trying to accumulate more information on which to base a decision signals either laziness or indecisiveness, nor that your sarcasm was at all necessary to prelude the small nugget of actual advice you ended with, but I suppose I still appreciate your perspective. Guess opening myself up to sass is part and parcel with leveraging online forums.
I think you got it. Advice with extra sass makes everyone happy.
.
Milan bc it is the cheapest.
Thanks
what did you decide on in the end?
Milan. The Italians are alive. The Spanish might be. The English once were, but currently (?).
I think the most important thing is to decide what kind of research area really interests you. If you interested in history-contextual architecture, go to Polimi. If you want to expirence these avant-garde thing, go to IAAC. If you are strong in academic research, go to Cambrige.
All the three places are good. No worries about the region nor language. Stay focused on your academic interests.