I was just accepted to all of my Landscape Architecture Masters Programs and I am having quite the hard time making a decision. The top two contenders are Harvard and USC. USC has more community-centric work which is what I am largely interested in, and is obviously a super interesting place to study landscape because of the risk its currently facing from climate change, wild fires etc. I can't help but feel like I am making a mistake turning down Harvard though. Everyone tells me I can work at any firm I want if I go there which seems like a silly opportunity to pass up... Anyone have any helpful advice for me?
thisisnotmyname
Apr 2, 19 2:53 pm
Harvard seems to be ranked higher than USC in surveys, but:
Which program will cost the least for you to attend?
Do you have a strong interest in living and practicing long-term in southern California?
bridgetnewsham
Apr 2, 19 3:07 pm
USC will cost 5k a year, and Harvard will cost 20k a year both not including cost of living. I am interested in living and practicing in Southern California for a period of my career.
SneakyPete
Apr 2, 19 4:23 pm
Looks pretty obvious to me. While a prestigious degree can open doors, they're not worth 15-30 extra thousand in debt, especially when the USC program seems tailor-made to meet your goals.
square.
Apr 13, 20 3:08 pm
gsd will cost you 70k in tuition alone.. cost of living in an expensive city will take you well over 100k. go for usc.. the fact that tuition for the whole degree is less than one year at gsd is enough
tramp0line
Apr 13, 20 8:00 pm
follow the money
midlander
Apr 2, 19 8:20 pm
cambridge and boston sit partly at sea level so you'll get lots of exposure to coastal flooding if climate change mitigation is your main concern in this choice. pick your element: water or fire?
Lolatez
Apr 13, 20 3:02 pm
Curious to know what you decided on. I am in the same situation right now east coast vs la for MLA.
placebeyondthesplines
Apr 13, 20 10:24 pm
setting aside whether cost "should" be the deciding factor (that's debatable), it doesn't seem to be particularly high on your list of criteria for choosing between programs. also, it's not like Los Angeles is a particularly inexpensive city.
so given that, why did you apply to the GSD? if it was just because "Harvard," then you should definitely go to USC. if you want to study with the best landscape faculty and students anywhere, and absolutely maximize the opportunities available to you upon graduation (including any possibility of teaching later on), the GSD is a pretty clear choice. USC will obviously have connections to the landscape world in Southern California, but Harvard will have them everywhere that landscape architecture is practiced (including Southern California).
also it's unfortunate that you were unable to attend a proper open house, because I think you'd really question the idea that "USC has more community-centric work" if you had.
placebeyondthesplines
Apr 13, 20 10:41 pm
oh for fuck's sake i didn't see that this was from 2019.
shellarchitect
Apr 15, 20 7:51 am
Dammit place...! You wasted some perfectly good advice
Hi Everyone,
I was just accepted to all of my Landscape Architecture Masters Programs and I am having quite the hard time making a decision. The top two contenders are Harvard and USC. USC has more community-centric work which is what I am largely interested in, and is obviously a super interesting place to study landscape because of the risk its currently facing from climate change, wild fires etc. I can't help but feel like I am making a mistake turning down Harvard though. Everyone tells me I can work at any firm I want if I go there which seems like a silly opportunity to pass up... Anyone have any helpful advice for me?
Harvard seems to be ranked higher than USC in surveys, but:
Which program will cost the least for you to attend?
Do you have a strong interest in living and practicing long-term in southern California?
USC will cost 5k a year, and Harvard will cost 20k a year both not including cost of living. I am interested in living and practicing in Southern California for a period of my career.
Looks pretty obvious to me. While a prestigious degree can open doors, they're not worth 15-30 extra thousand in debt, especially when the USC program seems tailor-made to meet your goals.
gsd will cost you 70k in tuition alone.. cost of living in an expensive city will take you well over 100k. go for usc.. the fact that tuition for the whole degree is less than one year at gsd is enough
follow the money
cambridge and boston sit partly at sea level so you'll get lots of exposure to coastal flooding if climate change mitigation is your main concern in this choice. pick your element: water or fire?
Curious to know what you decided on. I am in the same situation right now east coast vs la for MLA.
setting aside whether cost "should" be the deciding factor (that's debatable), it doesn't seem to be particularly high on your list of criteria for choosing between programs. also, it's not like Los Angeles is a particularly inexpensive city.
so given that, why did you apply to the GSD? if it was just because "Harvard," then you should definitely go to USC. if you want to study with the best landscape faculty and students anywhere, and absolutely maximize the opportunities available to you upon graduation (including any possibility of teaching later on), the GSD is a pretty clear choice. USC will obviously have connections to the landscape world in Southern California, but Harvard will have them everywhere that landscape architecture is practiced (including Southern California).
also it's unfortunate that you were unable to attend a proper open house, because I think you'd really question the idea that "USC has more community-centric work" if you had.
oh for fuck's sake i didn't see that this was from 2019.
Dammit place...! You wasted some perfectly good advice
¯\_(ツ)_/¯