<p>Even if you're sure about architecture, there are a few B.A. programs in architecture that approximate the B.Arch., but are much less intense and actually allow you to enjoy four years of undergrad, while exploring related fields. Some, like Yale's, are set within the architecture school, and allow an elite cadre of about 20 students to study hand-in-hand alongside the M.Arch. students and professors (the best architecture program in the country). The other thing is, if you limit yourself to B.Arch. programs, you're missing out on places like the Harvard Design and Yale Architecture schools.</p>
<p>not necessarily, because you can get a m.arch2 with a b.arch. my TA from cornell is currently studying either at Harvard or Yale right now. ..whereas it will take you a much longer time to get a m.arch 2 if you have a b.a because you'll then need to get a m.arch1 first..</p>
<p>in fact i think it is even better to, let's say "enjoy" harvard and yale without having to take in the professional stuff since you'd already have it if you have a 5 year b.arch. that way it's all creativity and exploration, at a much higher level.</p>
<p>Hey everyone,</p>
<p>So I have been scanning through all of the past convo's and it seems that there are tons of you that know what you are talking about when it comes to which is the better school and what not.</p>
<p>So here is a new one for yall.</p>
<p>I am a Sophomore taking as many Ap/ Honor classes as my school offers, I am in the top band as a flutist, I am part of the National Honor Soceity, GPA= 3.4+, varies from 3.4 to 3.6+, I am on varsity Swim team and its my first year ever swimming, as well as Varsity Water Polo, First year.(hopeing one of these days to get a scholarship)
I would like to stay on the western part of the US for college/University.</p>
<p>Oh and most of all I love Arch.!!!! It is my life, hobbie and, Dream!!!</p>
<p>So I was just wondering if any of you had and idea of a great school that fits my picky needs?</p>
<p>Thanks a bunch!!! :)</p>
<p>We can't let this thread die.</p>
<p>So, let me ask - where did all ye new archies end up this fall?</p>
<p>H2opologirl -</p>
<p>I'm a staunch supporter of 5-year programs versus 4+2, etc., as posterX knows, but...I'm starting to agree with the opinion that in your case, you might want to go with the 4+2 or 4+3, just because you have all these talents that you probably wouldn't want to let go by the wayside because of the 100-hour-a-week (at times) endeavor that is architecture school. So, for now, maybe pick a major interesting to you related to architecture (there are so many things that are, in some way or another) or go with the architectural studies major for these 4 years.</p>
<p>if you're absolutely sure that architecture is for you, i think the b.arch would be a better route. 4+2 is not a bad choice either, especially if you're interested in something else.</p>
<p>I can't read 73 pages of this thread to see if this has been discussed, but would it be a good route to go to UIC or UMD for architecture? or northeastern and go into the co-op program?</p>
<p>just in case you didn't know, you can use "search this thread" to find what you're looking for - it's located on the top right corner. </p>
<p>UIC has been discussed; just the characteristics thought and not really quality. None of the schools are really that good, and I'm sure co-op isn't available only at Northwestern. If you want rankings and other info, there is a condensed arch thread in the other college majors forum.</p>
<p>Does anybody have information about the architecture program at Barnard/Columbia? I know it offers a liberal arts degree, not a BArch</p>
<p>The leaders in the field tend to have B.A. --> M.Arch. There are many great examples of B.Arch leaders in architecture but the scale is tilted towards the M.Arch. I don't think that it's a good idea to limit yourself so early in your educational career. Explore the liberal arts and take architecture courses, but don't start your college career by putting on blinders and focusing only on studio courses for five years - especially for a field like architecture, where everything useful you eventually need to know will be learned from actually working in an office, not from anything in school.</p>
<p>How important is the portfolio for getting into cornell architecture? I ask this not because I have a bad portfolio, but a rather good one (much better than most who were accepted, according to someone I know who goes there). Will it give me a big advantage in admissions?</p>
<p>Thanks for your help</p>
<p>I am currently enrolled in a 4+2 program and in my honest opinion I would say that it's a much better path than the B.Arch. In only certain cases, ie. if you are interested in a more "engineered" architecture, would the five year program be for you. However in reply to an earlier post which recommended the 4+2 over the 5 because you wouldnt be working 100 hours in a week, this is not good advice...I work more than 100 hours a week sometimes and often find myself going 2-4 full days without sleep, so if time commitment (or how much money you make) is an issue just forget architecture entirely. </p>
<p>I have such strong faith in the 4+2 program because architects deal with such complex issues that 5 years of primarily traditional architectural courses (save some calc and physics) will not prepare you properly. As a young designer I owe so much to the liberal arts side of my education such as philosophy and art history, and am still wondering when differential equations will come in handy (that stuff is for structural engineers).</p>
<p>well..students do take a lot of art history and philosophy in their b.arch years...at least for cornell</p>
<p>Would anyone know where to find employment ratings comparing graduates from different universities?</p>
<p>Design intelligence rankings are probably the best kind of rankings for employment. DI surveys 250 top firms in the country, asking them to rank which schools provide the best students. If you're trying to decide on a school, rankings based on employment probably isn't the best tool to use. Employment rankings may express the demand of students from each school but doesn't necessarily reveal the quality of the school's education. Also, employment status revolves more on the economy of the nation. It usually happens in cycles.</p>
<p>asbuckeye07- I just have to defend the B.Arch program against some of your assumptions. First, a bachelors degree is a bachelors degree- they all require general education classes, and they all have some amount of free electives. I took classes in philosophy, anthropology, literature, writing, religion, geology, and yoga as well as architecture (which is not just differential equations). So to represent people in five year programs as simpletons because they don't take classes other than 'traditional architecture' is just blatantly wrong. I know that you want to promote the program you love, and that's nice and all, but don't lie to do so. You also imply that B.Arch programs overdo it on structural education- you'll find when you take your AREs, if licensure isn't too 'traditional' for you, that you'll use those equations then. A B.Arch program aims to teach you what you need to know for practice and licensure.</p>
<p>Maybe some 4 year programs are very intense- but that's also where you'll find programs that have you take less intense courses for your first two years and then step it up for the final two (ASU being one I know of that does this). A program like that would be ideal for someone who still wants to pursue competitive sports, and you won't find it in a 5 year format.</p>
<p>It seems the main difference between the two programs is that you can have a relatively normal college life for the first four years in the 6 year, while you worse your arse off all the way through in the 5 year. Of course, there are exceptions as to workload. Also, in some cases you end up with more liberal arts in the 6 year, but not all, since most 5 year programs require as much general ed (often slanted toward liberal arts since general chemistry or whatever is little use to an architect) as a 4 year degree does. 5 years just end up taking these within 18-hour courseloads rather than 15. But that depends on the school more than anything else.</p>
<p>How can you overdo structural education anyway? Without some sense of structure, architects are completely dispensible. As much as you need aesthetics, society can live without it, whereas buildings have to stand up, money or no money for designing them.</p>
<p>And, with a 5 year degree, you don't have to worry about getting stuck with a degree you can't or don't want to use after 4 years, without the money to complete the last two.</p>
<p>There's great examples of rounded educations at both and it's very hard to compare the two. I'm obviously for the five year, though.</p>
<p>if a B.Arch and a M.Arch are basically the same diplomas then what type of masters can someone who has a B.Arch do ?</p>
<p>btw is there anyone here going to mcgill arch next year?</p>
<p>if you have a b.arch you really don't need to get a m.arch because licensure does not require you go to grad school for people who have completed their b.arch. </p>
<p>but some people who are maybe interested in teaching one day or want to learn more about architecture would get the m.arch 2, which is shorter than the m.arch. the great thing about getting a b.arch is that you can go to grad school to study something else or get a degree that will compliment your b.arch...like a mba...or arch history...space architecture haha....whatever you want.</p>
<p>sashimi- I think I recognize you from somewhere else. By now, you probably recognize me, too. You're headed to Cornell in the fall, right?</p>
<p>Yeah, you can do a masters in planning, urban design, environmental design, building science/structural eng, landscape, anything. You can use it as an opportunity to expand your knowledge because you're not tied to needing the M.Arch for licensing purposes.</p>