<p>A good school is a good start.
Cooper Union, AA, and MIT are also my favorite non-ivy schools, and yes, they are cheaper, and more competitive.
Columbia is great since Tschumi is there, what if he left the school? The greatness of an institution sometimes depends on an individual.
A great designer should be a remarkable architect, a respectful educator, and a gorgeous writter, such as Wright and Koolhaas.
That's just my personal opinion, but the era of being a good architect without a good diploma is gone.</p>
<p>"the era of being a good architect without a good diploma is gone"</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but I just can't agree with this on any level. Sure great architecture schools are wonderful as a resource, but that is as far as they can go: a resource. Architecture is a personal thing, and to teach architecture, in turn, is extremely personal. So what it boils down to is that teaching design in a studio becomes something that is simply a particular instructor's opinion, no one can be "right" when it comes to architecture (despite the fact that there are plenty of people who are wrong). To give you an example one of my instructors, when asked why he dislikes organic/curvaceous form, stated: "It's not that curves are incorrect for building form, it's just not my expertise, and as an instructor you can only teach what you know." Architecture is not something you can memorize or study for (in the traditional sense), therefore I believe that school choice should be more personal and based less on how prestigious the school is.</p>
<p>Yes, architecture is a personal thing, but it cannot be TOO personal. You are not living in a world where a fantastic idea could be acceptable without something to prove that you are something.
Be realistic, to a young architect, the best way to make you a little bit special is to have a good diploma, a unique point of view, and some stuff that no one has. I know it is hard to have all three, but a diploma is always a passport that can take you to a better place.
I remember there was a professor who started his college at 23, he said there will never be too late to start. His first job was worked as an apprentice with a GSD graduate at SOM in New York, which paid him $30,000 a year. What if he didn't have a good diploma? He said he will be too poor to survive.
Years later, he told us that connection made him to be more lucky than others. Architects need to have good connections with all kinds of people.
As you said, great architecture schools are RESOURSES, under my interpretation, it including a solid connection. This is one of the resourses that cheaper and less pristigious schools lacks.</p>
<p>I will agree with you that a good dimploma will get you somewhere, but I believe it will only take you so far. And on that note it is my opinion that a diploma from any of the architecture schools ranked in the top half, coupled with great designing skills, is as good as the next one. Perhaps you're right, but I just find it hard to believe that one's diploma can hold more wieght than their portfolio, because after all, especially in architecture, it is about what you DO and not how much you shelled out for a degree.</p>
<p>Whether you will agree with me or not, you will realize the brutality is the reality.
Do you believe that people cheat on everything?Portfolio can also be a fake one, diploma,well, it is hard to make one to convince someone else since your lacking of skills and knowledge will be exposed someday. I know how important a great porfolio is, but the problem is this is a world full of cheaters, the best way to identify a person quickly is to take a look at the diploma holds in his hands. His abilities need to take longer time to be judged.When I want to deny the brutality, my mind tells me that I have to be aggressive and cold-blood. It is almost like a game of survival. The fittest left, and others gone.</p>
<p>I am talking about a portofolio in regards to BUILT works that an architect has had a hand in. You can't possibly tell me that a piece of paper (diploma) is more authentic than a building.</p>
<p>One could also be exposed for lacking the skills demonstrated in the portfolio. Past getting a foot-in for early jobs and internships, I disagree that a diploma will ever be stronger than a portfolio. As well, as an established architect no one will care where you went to school; they will care what you've done.</p>
<p>"As well, as an established architect no one will care where you went to school; they will care what you've done."</p>
<p>...my point exactly</p>
<p>It is always difficult to start your career,a diploma can definitely let you stand out from the rest of your rivalry. However, the diploma will be less important after years of experience, but that's still a thing which gives you a good beginning.
I think we are talking about different groups of people, my point is mainly support those newly graduates, and yours, is for architects who have been work for years.</p>
<p>Should we talk about somthing focus on architecture only?
We are out of topic now.</p>
<p>where's Fallinwater0328?</p>
<p>I am here!</p>
<p>I'm trying to decide between usc and cal poly, slo for next year. Any suggestions?</p>
<p>USC is better than Cal Poly, of course, it is more selective and expensive, so you'd better prepare a solid portfolio.</p>
<p>Nick05, what's slo? and which cal poly are you referring to cos there's one in Pomona and another in San Luis Obispo.
Sure, USC is the first that comes to mind.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only Yale Graduate architects I can think about are Norman Foster and Maya Lin
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What? Haven't you heard of Robert A.M. Stern, the current Dean of the YSOA? Or Charles Gwathmey, David Childs, Hugh Newell Jacobsen, Jacquelin Robertson, Allan Greenberg, Richard Rogers (who studied at Yale with Norman Foster), etc.? Then you have historical greats like William Adams Delano, James Gamble Rogers, Eero Saarinen, etc. Throw in the fact that Cesar Pelli was the Dean of the YSOA for a while, Frank Gehry teaches there currently, William Pedersen has taught there, and most architectural greats do at some point in their careers, and you have what is - in my mind - America's greatest school for architecture. A recent article I read in Architectural Digest said that Yale is, "by most lights, America's preeminent architecture school," and I couldn't agree more.</p>
<p>Can you tell I'm excited about studying there next year? I was accepted to Yale EA, and have applied to Princeton and Harvard RD - I want a balanced (read: not strictly architectural) program of study, as I enjoy the liberal arts. At this point, I don't see myself going to Princeton or Harvard if offered admission, although I am interested in their programs. After all, my cousin (an architect in NYC) was recently hired to teach at the YSOA. :)</p>
<p>Fallinwater, ive already been accepted to both, thats why im asking.</p>
<p>jrock, slo = san luis obispo.</p>
<p>vivaldi87, whatever you said if from a Yalie's point of view, but the truth is, Yale Architecture School had never ranked No.1, the best so far is No.2.</p>
<p>I guess you like Vivaldi's music, right?</p>
<p>Nick05, does USC offer you any scholarship or fin. aid? Because it is too expensive to go if you cannot receive some sort of support financially.</p>
<p>No scholarship; I doubt any aid. I'm going down to visit both schools in April. I'll have to be considerably impressed to choose usc over cal poly. I was also accepted to U. Oregon(in-state, safety) and U. Michigan(same money situation as usc and does not have BArch program), but I've narrowed it down to the two California schools.</p>