<p>How respected is Columbia's Architecture Department? Is the department well known for a particular specialization? Thank you!</p>
<p>I have no idea as to what the general consensus is about the architecture department, but if Lerner and the new science building are any indication of the quality of the department, I would say that it sucks.</p>
<p>Their MArch program is very well respected. I’ve seen various rankings that put it in the top 5.</p>
<p>Neither Lerner nor the Science buildings were designed by Columbia alums.</p>
<p>first, the science building was designed by rafael moneo, a winner of the Pritzker Prize.
second, lerner was designed by then dean of architecture bernie tschumi, one of the leading conceputal architects of our day especially in the deconstructivist school.</p>
<p>so just because you don’t know anything about architecture, doesn’t mean you should start spouting off your thoughts. are they functional, purposeful and unique? yes?</p>
<p>but i don’t see you complaining about Frank Gehry’s leaky building at MIT with similar vitriol.</p>
<p>as for the architecture department - it is defintely a leading school, probably most known for being the most theoretical department within the top 5 (that now includes yale, harvard, penn, columbia and mit). the ugrad though is not the rigorous B.Arch nor does it come with a combined M.Arch program as of yet. but of my friends who got their BA in Architecture many are at top programs or working for top firms (SOM, RAMSA, etc.).</p>
<p>if you want to see a building designed by a columbia alum, check out: [Broadway</a> Residence Hall - Robert A.M. Stern Architects](<a href=“http://www.ramsa.com/project.aspx?id=36]Broadway”>http://www.ramsa.com/project.aspx?id=36). not quite designed to stern’s original plan, but quite nice.</p>
<p>Nice post! I’m glad I put architecture down as my second major choice.</p>
<p>Lovely. Adoration.</p>