I started an M.Arch this semester, and I find the experience lacking. My studio class lacks direction. Every class is a desk crit, there's no discussion among students, no workshops or demonstrations by the professor, and no design process introduced. The professor relies heavily on precedents; basically telling us to look them up, and typically leaves early. Moreover, the professor is indifferent if students complete their projects. Several students didn't even make models for the midterm and nothing was said. In short, there is no sense of rigor and no sense of consequence for not doing the work--it feels like a participation-trophy culture. It's discouraging.
Meanwhile, in other classes, there is a lack of enthusiasm and organization. In one of my classes, the professor didn't give us a syllabus until halfway through the semester. Moreover, he asked us to put together a presentation, which I did, and then in the next class he changed his mind and said we don't need it after all. In another class, the professor shows us drafting techniques but in the form of recording the lecture at his computer and not engaging with the class. So, it's just us sitting there watching him basically create a video tutorial. He's not even looking at us.
It's not all bad though, my architectural history professor is incredibly engaging. Her lectures are the best I've ever experienced, and I relish her deep knowledge, the way she interacts with us and the way she ties in language, philosophy, anthropology and other humanities to architecture. She's one of the few professors I've had that has changed the way I think about the world. She makes me feel like I go to an ivy.
Yet, most of the students in my cohort resent her because she is a tough grader. They make fun of her enthusiasm in studio, which I resent. Unfortunately, I've also come to see myself as not having much in common with those in my cohort. I like them as people, but not as colleagues. There is a lot of complaining about the workload (which, I think is unfounded given the time-intensive nature of architectural work), and nobody sticks around studio to work, they all go home. The studio culture is practically nonexistent.
Anyways. What do you make of all this? I'm thinking I should cut my losses and apply to another program. I'm attending this school because it is what I can afford, and, admittedly, the only one I got into. But, I believe that if I applied again, I could get into one of those top ten schools. I wouldn't be doing it for the prestige, but for the experience: the culture, the professors like my history professor and, maybe, getting to be a part of a cohort that is more excited about architecture.
I've deliberately not named the school to protect my anonymity. I hope you understand.
@work
Nov 9, 22 11:25 pm
I get where you're coming from, I had a similar experience. I would say that the grass isn't always greener and I'd hesitate spending/extend anything more for a degree that's ROI is miniscule pay. I've visited a lot of grad schools since my friends fanned out after undergrad and I had worked for a while before getting my MArch and can say that you're not alone. I might change perspective and look at it as a networking opportunity, it's a time to connect with peers and teachers that can open doors. Don't go down the rabbit hole of shutting yourself in. TBH, a box well illustrated suffices for most studio projects, use the time outside of class to experiment on your own interests and connect with peers and faculty and think about setting yourself up best for your future career.
ivanleonidov
Nov 10, 22 1:40 pm
@work thank you for the advice. It's reassuring to know this isn't an exactly unique experience. "a box well illustrated" gave me a chuckle. At times that is what I see pinned up during reviews. I like the idea of taking the extra time to experiment and network. I am lucky enough to be in a big city, so I might just lean more into the idea that arch school is a small part of the arch learning experience and such. Thanks again.
Volunteer
Nov 10, 22 8:54 am
If the Dean was worth anything you wouldn't be having these issues.
square.
Nov 10, 22 9:27 am
In short, there is no sense of rigor and no sense of consequence for not doing the work--it feels like a participation-trophy culture
this is unfortunately common in architecture school; remember typically you're being taught by either practicing architects, who are principally concerned with outcomes, or faux-intellectual hacks who cherry pick whatever half-baked idea happens to be floating in their head at the time. in both cases unfortunately there is little serious effort in developing a rigorous pedagogy, since the profession is full of folks who have a bootstraps/ "i did my time" mentality on both sides of the equation.
on the other hand, you can see the fruit of the history professor who was most likely trained as a serious academic.
i too was frustrated by this. on occasion i had some serious professors in studio who were dedicated teachers, but in terms of intellectual rigor, i would seek guidance from those trained in historically rigorous disciplines like those in the humanities. does your school let you take electives outside of the department? i found this the best way to supplement my studio professors who were disinterested.
l3wis
Nov 10, 22 10:51 am
if its the only school you can afford and get into then i think you're kind of stuck. why are you so confident you can get into a 'top ten' school as well as afford it next year?
you should feel inspired in architecture school but honestly its a total bubble and has little to do with practice and working in real firms and companies. I mean hardly anything to do. so it's less important than you might think.
working hard and teaching yourself, being self-motivated and driven will get you way way way farther than being around good or great teachers and fellow students. trust me. lean into those relationships w/ professors and students you respect and admire. and then focus on distinguishing yourself from the herd and teaching yourself. i blossomed as an architecture student when i realized i just needed to take my direction more seriously and work hard to become better. it had nothing to do with my schools and studios which are very ephemeral in the grand scheme of your career.
find work you admire in books and the web and start learning and emulating it. if a professor has no track record of good design work then take their feedback with a grain of salt and keep doing what you're interested in doing.
deltar
Nov 10, 22 11:06 am
Not a masters but currently in a B. Arch program now and I've had similar experiences with a couple professors. I've taken it as a free course where I can do whatever I want within the given program. I won't say that my projects are good because they were second year projects, but I had fun making them. There are several students in my cohort that just skate and while it bothers me (group projects with them were a nightmare) I don't let it sour me on the students that are doing good work too. My suggestion is to rise above and let your work speak to your abilities without regard for your classmates.
Chad Miller
Nov 10, 22 11:11 am
/\ This. The advice above is ver, very good.
When you're first out of school your major selling points will be:
Do you have any student intern experience.
How well you know certain programs.
Your portfolio of student work.
Depending on the firm the importance of each of these can vary greatly.
deltar
Nov 10, 22 11:31 am
Definitely, I'm banking hard on my AHJ experience and code knowledge when I enter the architectural market. I do have the benefit of having a good working relationship with all of the local architects.
ambrbk
Nov 10, 22 11:17 am
Transferring to highly ranked schools will not guarantee you finding what you are looking for. Literally the only thing that is guaranteed is the prestige of the name that you will be able to put in your resume.
Do you want a rigorous cirirculum that focuses on fantasy super structure that will somehow solve the problem of the lack of public infrastructure in SE Asia? That is the bullshit I was forced to entertain; doing "research", making up pseudo jargons, deriving design from collages I did not want to do. Because the professors were "rigorous" and passionate about their method, every session was a fight and a waste of time in hindsight.
I am sure there is a program somewhere that fits you better, but don't go by ranking. Lean into professors that are competant, and the books from the masters.
Chad Miller
Nov 10, 22 11:21 am
Look for schools that have professors with real world experience. At the very least your studio professors should have a couple of decades of practicing architecture.
gual
Nov 10, 22 3:57 pm
First year can be a disappointment. See what the upper years are doing. Are they doing interesting things? Is there depth/breadth in their work? Talk to them about what their first year was like. See if there's a prof doing interesting stuff that you want to learn, and see if they will let you work for them during the term. Or if you don't have specific interests, start working at a firm part-time.
I went to a school that had great resources but the dean at the time was antagonistic toward my area of interest. I still learned a lot but I spent as little time as possible on the studio courses. My portfolio upon leaving contained zero studio projects -- all independent studies, elective projects, and internship work. You have to be thick-skinned, but it can work. At most schools in North America they're going to pass you if you put something on the wall, so you sort of have free reign to learn whatever you want.
As for your classmates: there's a lot of groupthink and misdirected stress in first year, it will subside. You might be one of those people who gets along with people outside your cohort, though. It happens.
ivanleonidov
Nov 13, 22 2:45 pm
Hi all, thank you for your comments. I really appreciate the variety of perspectives and straightforwardness. After a bit more consideration, I'm going to stay the course with the program since I see that the work that the upper years are doing is interesting, and there is one professor (and I'm sure more) that teach at that level that I will work to study under. Other thoughts that stuck with me is what exactly I can do to make myself attractive to employers... considering part-time work... not being too rigid with studio (this is a big paradigm shift for me)... and taking electives outside the school. Feeling a bit more optimistic. Thank you for stomaching my rant. Just the act alone was a relief.
kenchiku
Nov 14, 22 7:17 am
School is what you make of it.
No discussion between students? Well, get up and go talk to your classmates.
The whole point of working in studio is to talk to and learn from/help your classmates. Rigor is not something created by a professor, but by the level of engagement with the semester project by the students. I've had some total blowoff professors who didn't give a fuck, but my talented classmates still engaged with the course and we all pushed eachother to do the best work we were capable of doing.
You're in a master's course, there is more self direction and rigor expected. Do what YOU find interesting, don't wait for your professors to tell you to do something.
HYLA
Nov 28, 22 2:08 am
Actually, this school is the perfect place for you to learn the most important skill in an architect - how to do great work despite everyone around you trying to prevent you from doing so.
Here you will learn how to learn from the bad, from the lazy, from the unmotivated, from the self-interested. You will learn in spite of the negative environment.
As you have also pointed out, there are gems everywhere (like your history professor). No one else may notice it, but you do. Then you will suck in all that you can learn and grow with it.
And most importantly, you will learn by yourself. You will learn that the greatest learning comes from within you. Not from others.
Hi all,
I need to rant.
Is this normal?
I started an M.Arch this semester, and I find the experience lacking. My studio class lacks direction. Every class is a desk crit, there's no discussion among students, no workshops or demonstrations by the professor, and no design process introduced. The professor relies heavily on precedents; basically telling us to look them up, and typically leaves early. Moreover, the professor is indifferent if students complete their projects. Several students didn't even make models for the midterm and nothing was said. In short, there is no sense of rigor and no sense of consequence for not doing the work--it feels like a participation-trophy culture. It's discouraging.
Meanwhile, in other classes, there is a lack of enthusiasm and organization. In one of my classes, the professor didn't give us a syllabus until halfway through the semester. Moreover, he asked us to put together a presentation, which I did, and then in the next class he changed his mind and said we don't need it after all. In another class, the professor shows us drafting techniques but in the form of recording the lecture at his computer and not engaging with the class. So, it's just us sitting there watching him basically create a video tutorial. He's not even looking at us.
It's not all bad though, my architectural history professor is incredibly engaging. Her lectures are the best I've ever experienced, and I relish her deep knowledge, the way she interacts with us and the way she ties in language, philosophy, anthropology and other humanities to architecture. She's one of the few professors I've had that has changed the way I think about the world. She makes me feel like I go to an ivy.
Yet, most of the students in my cohort resent her because she is a tough grader. They make fun of her enthusiasm in studio, which I resent. Unfortunately, I've also come to see myself as not having much in common with those in my cohort. I like them as people, but not as colleagues. There is a lot of complaining about the workload (which, I think is unfounded given the time-intensive nature of architectural work), and nobody sticks around studio to work, they all go home. The studio culture is practically nonexistent.
Anyways. What do you make of all this? I'm thinking I should cut my losses and apply to another program. I'm attending this school because it is what I can afford, and, admittedly, the only one I got into. But, I believe that if I applied again, I could get into one of those top ten schools. I wouldn't be doing it for the prestige, but for the experience: the culture, the professors like my history professor and, maybe, getting to be a part of a cohort that is more excited about architecture.
I've deliberately not named the school to protect my anonymity. I hope you understand.
I get where you're coming from, I had a similar experience. I would say that the grass isn't always greener and I'd hesitate spending/extend anything more for a degree that's ROI is miniscule pay. I've visited a lot of grad schools since my friends fanned out after undergrad and I had worked for a while before getting my MArch and can say that you're not alone. I might change perspective and look at it as a networking opportunity, it's a time to connect with peers and teachers that can open doors. Don't go down the rabbit hole of shutting yourself in. TBH, a box well illustrated suffices for most studio projects, use the time outside of class to experiment on your own interests and connect with peers and faculty and think about setting yourself up best for your future career.
@work thank you for the advice. It's reassuring to know this isn't an exactly unique experience. "a box well illustrated" gave me a chuckle. At times that is what I see pinned up during reviews. I like the idea of taking the extra time to experiment and network. I am lucky enough to be in a big city, so I might just lean more into the idea that arch school is a small part of the arch learning experience and such. Thanks again.
If the Dean was worth anything you wouldn't be having these issues.
In short, there is no sense of rigor and no sense of consequence for not
doing the work--it feels like a participation-trophy culture
this is unfortunately common in architecture school; remember typically you're being taught by either practicing architects, who are principally concerned with outcomes, or faux-intellectual hacks who cherry pick whatever half-baked idea happens to be floating in their head at the time. in both cases unfortunately there is little serious effort in developing a rigorous pedagogy, since the profession is full of folks who have a bootstraps/ "i did my time" mentality on both sides of the equation.
on the other hand, you can see the fruit of the history professor who was most likely trained as a serious academic.
i too was frustrated by this. on occasion i had some serious professors in studio who were dedicated teachers, but in terms of intellectual rigor, i would seek guidance from those trained in historically rigorous disciplines like those in the humanities. does your school let you take electives outside of the department? i found this the best way to supplement my studio professors who were disinterested.
if its the only school you can afford and get into then i think you're kind of stuck. why are you so confident you can get into a 'top ten' school as well as afford it next year?
you should feel inspired in architecture school but honestly its a total bubble and has little to do with practice and working in real firms and companies. I mean hardly anything to do. so it's less important than you might think.
working hard and teaching yourself, being self-motivated and driven will get you way way way farther than being around good or great teachers and fellow students. trust me. lean into those relationships w/ professors and students you respect and admire. and then focus on distinguishing yourself from the herd and teaching yourself. i blossomed as an architecture student when i realized i just needed to take my direction more seriously and work hard to become better. it had nothing to do with my schools and studios which are very ephemeral in the grand scheme of your career.
find work you admire in books and the web and start learning and emulating it. if a professor has no track record of good design work then take their feedback with a grain of salt and keep doing what you're interested in doing.
Not a masters but currently in a B. Arch program now and I've had similar experiences with a couple professors. I've taken it as a free course where I can do whatever I want within the given program. I won't say that my projects are good because they were second year projects, but I had fun making them. There are several students in my cohort that just skate and while it bothers me (group projects with them were a nightmare) I don't let it sour me on the students that are doing good work too. My suggestion is to rise above and let your work speak to your abilities without regard for your classmates.
/\ This. The advice above is ver, very good.
When you're first out of school your major selling points will be:
Depending on the firm the importance of each of these can vary greatly.
Definitely, I'm banking hard on my AHJ experience and code knowledge when I enter the architectural market. I do have the benefit of having a good working relationship with all of the local architects.
Transferring to highly ranked schools will not guarantee you finding what you are looking for. Literally the only thing that is guaranteed is the prestige of the name that you will be able to put in your resume.
Do you want a rigorous cirirculum that focuses on fantasy super structure that will somehow solve the problem of the lack of public infrastructure in SE Asia? That is the bullshit I was forced to entertain; doing "research", making up pseudo jargons, deriving design from collages I did not want to do. Because the professors were "rigorous" and passionate about their method, every session was a fight and a waste of time in hindsight.
I am sure there is a program somewhere that fits you better, but don't go by ranking. Lean into professors that are competant, and the books from the masters.
Look for schools that have professors with real world experience. At the very least your studio professors should have a couple of decades of practicing architecture.
First year can be a disappointment. See what the upper years are doing. Are they doing interesting things? Is there depth/breadth in their work? Talk to them about what their first year was like. See if there's a prof doing interesting stuff that you want to learn, and see if they will let you work for them during the term. Or if you don't have specific interests, start working at a firm part-time.
I went to a school that had great resources but the dean at the time was antagonistic toward my area of interest. I still learned a lot but I spent as little time as possible on the studio courses. My portfolio upon leaving contained zero studio projects -- all independent studies, elective projects, and internship work. You have to be thick-skinned, but it can work. At most schools in North America they're going to pass you if you put something on the wall, so you sort of have free reign to learn whatever you want.
As for your classmates: there's a lot of groupthink and misdirected stress in first year, it will subside. You might be one of those people who gets along with people outside your cohort, though. It happens.
Hi all, thank you for your comments. I really appreciate the variety of perspectives and straightforwardness. After a bit more consideration, I'm going to stay the course with the program since I see that the work that the upper years are doing is interesting, and there is one professor (and I'm sure more) that teach at that level that I will work to study under. Other thoughts that stuck with me is what exactly I can do to make myself attractive to employers... considering part-time work... not being too rigid with studio (this is a big paradigm shift for me)... and taking electives outside the school. Feeling a bit more optimistic. Thank you for stomaching my rant. Just the act alone was a relief.
School is what you make of it.
No discussion between students? Well, get up and go talk to your classmates.
The whole point of working in studio is to talk to and learn from/help your classmates. Rigor is not something created by a professor, but by the level of engagement with the semester project by the students. I've had some total blowoff professors who didn't give a fuck, but my talented classmates still engaged with the course and we all pushed eachother to do the best work we were capable of doing.
You're in a master's course, there is more self direction and rigor expected. Do what YOU find interesting, don't wait for your professors to tell you to do something.
Actually, this school is the perfect place for you to learn the most important skill in an architect - how to do great work despite everyone around you trying to prevent you from doing so.
Here you will learn how to learn from the bad, from the lazy, from the unmotivated, from the self-interested. You will learn in spite of the negative environment.
As you have also pointed out, there are gems everywhere (like your history professor). No one else may notice it, but you do. Then you will suck in all that you can learn and grow with it.
And most importantly, you will learn by yourself. You will learn that the greatest learning comes from within you. Not from others.
(from an old dog)