Hi! I'm planning to apply to grad school for the Fall 2019 intake in the US. I'm very keen on the MS. Advanced Architectural Design courses as they resonate with my goals.
This program is typically a year long and while that isn't a concern for me, I've received feedback from some seasoned professionals (20+ years of experience) in the field saying that I'd benefit more from an M.Arch that's at least two years long. Their reasoning is that one year programs boasting advanced application of technology and design methodology are a fad and not particularly respected professionally. Is this true?
Because some of the university websites for the M.Arch programs even mention that students with a 5 year degree in architecture ( I've got a B.Arch from a school in India and have 3 years of practical experience) would benefit more from the MS programs - completely contradictory to the advice I've received.
Would appreciate any insight into this! Thanks!
Steeplechase
Sep 29, 18 1:38 pm
Those MS websites are referring to graduates with a US, NAAB accredited 5-year B.Arch. Those persons don’t need a longer, accredited M.Arch because they have already met NCARB’s education requirements. If you want to be licensed in the US then an accredited M.Arch is probably the easiest option unless you are certain your foreign degree will be accepted.
rmayk
Sep 30, 18 12:47 am
Thanks for your response! Hadn't planned on continuing to work in the US but this definitely explains some things.
Hi! I'm planning to apply to grad school for the Fall 2019 intake in the US. I'm very keen on the MS. Advanced Architectural Design courses as they resonate with my goals.
This program is typically a year long and while that isn't a concern for me, I've received feedback from some seasoned professionals (20+ years of experience) in the field saying that I'd benefit more from an M.Arch that's at least two years long. Their reasoning is that one year programs boasting advanced application of technology and design methodology are a fad and not particularly respected professionally. Is this true?
Because some of the university websites for the M.Arch programs even mention that students with a 5 year degree in architecture ( I've got a B.Arch from a school in India and have 3 years of practical experience) would benefit more from the MS programs - completely contradictory to the advice I've received.
Would appreciate any insight into this! Thanks!
Those MS websites are referring to graduates with a US, NAAB accredited 5-year B.Arch. Those persons don’t need a longer, accredited M.Arch because they have already met NCARB’s education requirements. If you want to be licensed in the US then an accredited M.Arch is probably the easiest option unless you are certain your foreign degree will be accepted.
Thanks for your response! Hadn't planned on continuing to work in the US but this definitely explains some things.