<p>It sounds like you are focused on the practical application of your degree after graduation. I would argue that you should not expect a university to prepare you 100% to work unless you go to a vocational school or a very practical school like The BAC (which I strongly considered). There is no way that in the 2-3 years you’re in ANY M.Arch program that you will be taught everything you’ll need to drop right into a job straight out of school since they only have time to expose you to a general framework which includes design, building types, codes, structure, history, tech, materials, life safety, space planning, aesthetics, presentation skills, etc. etc. etc. all while you’re trying to learn drawing software and modelmaking. And that’s assuming you’re already good with a computer and tools. And staying awake many many hours. The program you choose should be the one that you like, not the one that will prepare you for a job.</p>
<p>The thing is, firms often specialize in different markets/building types which all have different construction requirements and codes to deal with. For example, a single family home is generally built from lumber (2x4, 2x6, etc.) and has a smaller subset of codes to adhere to. Make that a multifamily dwelling, and suddenly you have a much larger set of rules and construction options. Go above a certain height, and you’ll have to switch from wood to steel construction which has its own set of knowledge and rules. Go above a certain square footage and you’ll need to add firewalls and be cognizant of many other restrictions, not to mention ADA and ANSI requirements which are not required for single-family. And within each construction option there are multiple products to choose from, often with different installation techniques, requiring different detail drawings. Can you imagine trying to shoehorn all of that stuff into a class along with everything else?</p>
<p>The good news is that most companies know this and don’t necessarily expect you to know construction details straight out of school. That’s also why we have to do so many hours of internship and take tests before we can become licensed. You won’t get hired as a project manager just because you took 2 extra classes in roof and wall construction - NCARB licensing requirements ensure that we all start at the bottom as lowly interns and work our way up. </p>
<p>Most of the companies I spoke with are more interested in knowing you can problem solve, are detail-oriented, hard-working, fast-thinking, quick-learning, and smart. They will teach you the rest. Every company has its own presentation standards and often some standardized construction details anyway, so even if you learn a bunch of specific construction techniques in school, they will likely be different from firm-to-firm or project-to-project. Having said that, you should know how a wall/roof/floor/foundation is generally put together, but you will see many variations in “the real world.” After all, a home in sunny, seismically active California will not be built the same way as a home in snowy Michigan or swampy, hurricane-prone Florida. Or at least, we hope not.</p>
<p>Getting a summer internship/co-op is extremely important; more important than what classes you’re taking. This is a people-centric industry - relationships are key - and the more people who know who you are and like you, the more likely you will get a job when you graduate (referrals, networking, recommendations). For your first internship, you will likely be at the bottom as a CAD-monkey. Architecture companies exist to make money, so companies are interested in what you can do for them (e.g. how fast can you get on your feet and produce line drawings), and usually not in how pretty your renderings are (until you get hired for a design position someday). Get good with AutoCAD and Sketchup, and if you can, with Revit or ArchiCAD in case you come across a company using BIM. And when I say “good,” I mean learn the keyboard shortcuts and commands so that you can produce drawings quickly. You will never finish any of your school projects 100% (if they’re any good), but you need to produce enough to get your ideas across and create multiple iterations to refine them so that you have a good portfolio (no company ever asked me what my grades were, and instead judged me by my portfolio and experience).</p>
<p>As far as “theory-based” vs. “design-based” vs. “construction-based,” that all depends on you, but I’m not clear on what you mean. </p>
<p>If by “theory-based” you mean computational design like Sci-Arc is known for, many schools will have optional classes which touch on this topic, which in 20 years may not be so theoretical. Certainly using computational design software to manipulate space can make freaky shapes, or it can be used to quickly generate repeating or slightly differing modules for a hotel, so the theoretical stuff can be used in the “real world,” but the question is, are you interested in letting the computer do the work or do you prefer a more organic approach? </p>
<p>Regarding “construction-based,” do you mean “design-build?” Some programs, like Auburn or Clemson offer studios which have you physically building things that you design. There are also Construction Science degrees which specifically deal with the contractor’s side of things (not the design so much) and construction details - maybe that’s more to your liking. The Construction Documents that architects produce leave a fair amount of the actual execution up to the contractor’s expertise and, in large projects, often consultants for plumbing, electrical, HVAC, etc. are used so you may not necessarily get into those details. From personal experience, having hands-on construction experience helped me visualize my projects and quickly understand details, so I would recommend getting involved with Habitat for Humanity and building one of their houses if you can or helping friends and family with do-it-yourself projects. In one weekend you can pick up how the floor/wall/roof are constructed in that particular building type. </p>
<p>As far as I’m concerned, it’s all “design-based” since in every project you use different drivers to inform your design (e.g. your theory regulates your design or the computer generates your design, or the materials, site, or budget constrain your design). Ultimately, you as an architect are designing the space, but the path that takes you there can be influenced by many factors. </p>
<p>In the end, the program is not as important as what you make of it. You could go to Rice or Harvard, but if the program or people are not for you, then your portfolio will probably not be as good as if you go to a 2nd or 3rd tier school and really get engaged, meet people, and like where you are. Or, if the school’s name and reputation are important, then you may underperform if you go to a less well-known program. I graduated this past May from a very well-rounded M.Arch program at a less well-known school that allowed me to explore computational design, experimental structures and design-build but was probably what you might consider more design-based. A month later I was offered a job at a 35-person firm in another state using software that I had never heard of doing multi-million dollar projects with building types that I had no experience with, but because my program exposed me to a lot of general knowledge, I could roll with the punches and am currently racking up the IDP credits and learning a ton of stuff. It’s kind of like trying to drink from a firehose, but I’m enjoying it.</p>
<p>If you are concerned with a lack of construction knowledge, pick up one of the books in the Taunton Press series called “Builder’s Guide to…” by Joseph Lstiburek. Check out the various books by Francis Ching. At some point you should buy “The Architect’s Studio Companion,” but maybe not until your second year. Lastly, “Construction: Principles, materials and methods” is more than a thousand pages of bedside reading detailing what goes where and how. Some of these might be available at your library or through inter-library loan if your state has that.</p>
</p>