My nephew is a mechanical engineering major and he got an internship with an Austin construction company this past summer. They started him out out in the field - he was a gofer, doing whatever they asked. The second half of the summer, he was in the office performing simple calculations and shadowing engineers. That kind of situation would be ideal for a student. They need to see what the “real world” is like. Drawing pretty pictures is just a small part of the job.
1 Like
What was the frustration? Was it mostly that it wasn’t what he expected?
Oh, no, I meant I was frustrated with him, at his lack of understanding about how the precast concrete panels I was detailing would be placed. And expecting me, somebody far down the food chain, to provide information about the foundation that should have been on the contract documents.
1 Like
Perhaps it means that “crafting a class” as highly rejective colleges do makes less difference in the vibrancy of the actual class than the class crafters think it does.
After all, don’t some of those highly rejective colleges turn those carefully crafted classes of vibrant diverse students into management consulting and investment banking employees?
1 Like
@ucbalumnus, I get the sarcasm but not the point.
Both an architecture education and an architecture career require a comfort level with both building technology and design. Studios are a major part of the NAAB mandated curriculum. They can be very intense (especially the critiques) and students who are not prepared for the creative side of architecture can flounder.
That’s why the majority of BArch programs look for some indication that the applicant will be able to handle the studio element. Some schools require (or recommend) portfolios, and most require essays (or personal statements), letters of recommendation and/or interviews.
Since Cal Poly SLO doesn’t appear to consider any of these additional criteria, it’s unclear how they judge applicants’ suitability. This apparent disregard of the design element is odd since both Art and Design and Music applicants may be asked to submit portfolios or performance materials respectively. So why not architecture?
In @Larchitecture’s daughter’s case, presumably her three years of courses in architecture and design can be entered on her application under categories G&F. If she has a strong portfolio, it would be great if that could be considered too.
POSTSCRIPT: Dear UC Santa Barbara: Don't let a petulant billionaire build a prison dorm on your campus
1 Like
@Larchitecture
On the SLO Decision Discussion Thread for this year, I saw that several prospective students did submit a portfolio for Architecture. Even though the website states it is not required, if a student is interested in the submission, then they should contact admissions and find out the details.
Another point that I would like to make and I have stated this before regarding UC admissions, test blind status and complaints from parents is that a student has a choice in where they want to apply. If the SLO admission system does not consider an applicants particular strengths, then it may not be a wise decision for that student to apply to the program.
Third point regarding HS courses. Yes the Architecture design courses probably will fulfill the CSU F and G requirements but for SLO the major rigor points in the MCA calculation are for Math and Science courses so hopefully these courses did not replace the core Math and Science courses.
3 Likes
Perhaps both Cal Polys are depending on student self selection, similar to how they and other CSUs largely depend on student self selection into various majors (including engineering majors, nursing, etc.) rather than more subjective admissions criteria intended to find which students have high school achievements related to the majors. Given the CSUs’ historic mission to provide accessible education, they may be reluctant to go too far into criteria beyond basic college preparation (the well known a-g requirements) that may not be as widely accessible across high school students (although CPSLO does give bonus points for more advanced math and foreign language than the a-g minimum).
The Munger Hall design with its mostly windowless bedrooms basically trades away the bedroom windows in order to get higher density on a given size piece of land. Of course, either way, an architect can do some nice art and design work on it, but whatever art and design work is done does not affect the basic tradeoff chosen.
There was a previous thread on the subject: Proposed Munger Hall (4,500 student dorm) controversy
1 Like
I’ll definitely have her contact the admissions office about a portfolio.
She will have 5 science classes and math through Calculus AB by the end of her senior year. Plus 4 years of foreign language - Japanese. One year of art. Several AP. So I think she’ll be good as far as classes go. She has other extracurriculars and 3 president positions. Since we’re OOS, who knows how that’ll play into things.
2 Likes
I think this point needs to emphasized. SLO waitlists and/or rejects applicants that have been accepted to schools like Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, etc. And then when SLO releases its admission decisions, they’ll release acceptances first, then WL’s followed by rejections at the end. And the pattern spreads over 3-4 weeks.
So, to borrow an expression from a poster above, their “byzantine” process of selecting applicants and their methodology of sending out decisions can upset folks. So, if applying to SLO, please take heed.
You also may want to consider Taubman College at Michigan for architecture, which allows portfolios:
2 Likes
If CPSLO published its admission formula and the past thresholds by major (like some CSUs such as SJSU, CSUN, CSUFresno, and CPP), that would take a lot of the mystery out of its “byzantine” admission process.
According to Freshman Student Profile , a CPP applicant for architecture who did not have any of the bonus points for local area, first generation, etc. (unfortunately, CPP does not publish the bonus point values) needed a 3.958 HS GPA (as recalculated for CSU, similar to UC weighted capped) to get the 4408 points for admission. Note that all other majors in CPP’s College of Environmental design needed only a 2.500 HS GPA to get 2950 points for admission.
2 Likes
My concern for the OP’s daughter is not with California’s admissions rating system. I don’t have a horse in this race and understand that CA can apply any admission system that they think best serves their residents.
My concern is (was) solely with BArch admissions. Other CPSLO majors – Art & Design, Music – ask applicants to provide supplemental materials to demonstrate their talent level. Since design and creativity are integral elements of an architecture education, it would therefore make sense for CPSLO to allow architecture applicants to submit portfolios for evaluation.
I now understand from @Gumbymom that some applicants have submitted architecture portfolios. However, CPSLO’s policy and procedure for submitting and evaluating architecture portfolios is not clearly stated. They omit this information on their otherwise very detailed website, either deliberately or by oversight, which seems out of sync with their goal to be transparent and equitable.
The OP’s daughter is not a CA resident and presumably is not reliant on the CA public system for an affordable education. She will have BArch options in other states, and if she chooses to pursue the BS+MArch (like UMich’s program) then she will have many choices.
However, California residents who wish to pursue the BArch in CA only have 2 publicoptions: CPSLO & CPP. No other schools in the UC or CS system offer an accredited BArch. Of course CA residents could go with a private university (like USC or Sci-Arc) or with a BS+MArch combination (like Berkeley or UCLA), but these options may well entail additional cost.
I think it does both the applicants and the schools a disservice that there is no vehicle in place to recognize their design talent as part of the admissions process.
2 Likes
Caveat: I have not looked at Cal Poly’s architecture pages.
If Cal Poly makes it clear that students may submit an optional architecture portfolio, that’s great. But with the Cal Polys being the only two public architecture options, I think that having a portfolio requirement is a very intimidating bar, especially for students who were not fortunate enough to be able to take architecture classes in high school.
I don’t know whether there’s a secondary admission/review after a year or two of coursework that allows students to come in with an interest but not the particular skillset and to teach them the skills, and then have that secondary review to let them proceed through the major if they have shown adequate promise/skill. I see how that can be nerve-wracking to have a secondary admission, and what if I don’t get past it, but for students who have no experience going in to college, it would otherwise seem to preclude them from going into the architecture field if there was a portfolio requirement.
1 Like
Actually Auburn and Virginia Tech (which have highly regarded BArchs) have implemented secondary admission requirements. No portfolios are reviewed for admissions, and all students take fundamental design courses before applying to the BArch programs.
Most BArch programs In which portfolios are required or optional specify that the portfolios need not contain examples of architectural design. They understand that few high school students have had training in architecture. What they are looking for is a demonstration of creativity and design sense plus a facility with various media especially drawing.
This is no different from screening for aptitude in music, fine art, theater or dance. (Which CPSLO already does for Art & Design and Music admissions.) Whether it’s fair or not natural talent isn’t distributed equally 
As I mentioned architecture studios can be quite intense. Students who don’t have a foundation in art can be overwhelmed and discouraged when asked to translate abstract concepts visually and to explain and defend their work. Even at tech schools studio is about 50% of the course work.
Out of personal interest, I’ve been looking at architecture admissions for about 10 years since my son got his MArch. My conclusion is that the BArch is only suitable for high school students who are comfortable with and have some prior experience with both the tech and design facets of architecture.
Otherwise, the BS/BA+MArch route is a better alternative. Now it’s up to the schools of architecture to make the combination more affordable and equitable.
1 Like
Seems like they’d have to be pretty certain they want to be architects too, or go to a school where it’s relatively easy to switch.
One of the local architects got his BArch at Cal Poly after switching out of ME. He has high praise for the program.
The architecture graveyard is one of the coolest features on any campus that I’ve ever seen.
1 Like