<p>No to Syracuse?? How interesting.</p>
<p>Well unless you are really into the engineering thing, than RPI might not be your thing...</p>
<p>Then from there, it's a tie between CP and CMU....</p>
<p>Sara,</p>
<p>Great description of the detailed factors going into your decision. We'll have to see if our numbers come out the same - with not much difference in cost of attendance between the final choices. I think you have the right approach on finding the school that fits you, not necessarily the school that everyone says you should go to (because of rep, rank, etc). I agree with you on the travel evaluation - it is more than just distance. There are some long flights that I'd rather do than medium drives.</p>
<p>When it comes to jobs, while the name of the school may help get you the interview, it seems that your experiences, portfolio and how you express yourself are probably more important for whether you get the job.</p>
<p>It also sounds like you wouldn't be happy working at a place that only cares about what school you went to.</p>
<p>Glad you had a great time at prom!</p>
<p>wow, no to Syracuse . By the way .. by any chance does the arch. program at Syracuse contain a bit of engineering? .</p>
<p>By the way .. by any chance does the arch. program at Syracuse contain a bit of engineering?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>phoenician,</p>
<p>As I love, and am good at, physics and math I originally was looking for an engineering heavy arch program and was always told go get an engineering degree, then a MArch.</p>
<p>-sara</p>
<p>And then there were three....</p>
<p>Cal Poly
Carnegie Mellon
Wentworth Institute of Technology</p>
<p>-sara</p>
<p>Cal Polyyyy for the win.</p>
<p>Are you kidding? Carnegie Mellon looks/sounds better than the rest.</p>
<p>is it possible to apply for MArch without a BArch ?.. I mean I have been taking the most difficult courses in Maths and Physics [ A-Level FURTHER MATHEMATICS & physics] ... AAAAAAHHHH .. !!! Okay , im kind of lost. What do you think of architectural engineering . any good? ... the thing is I cant not do architecture, i have the talent and I really really like it... </p>
<p>PS: VERY CONFUSING POST . I KNOW :)</p>
<p>Yes, you most definitely can do a MArch without a BArch. My daughter is about to graduate with a BA and is entering a MArch degree program in the fall. There are two routes to becoming an architect. One is a BA + MArch and the other is a five year BArch. Either one gets you to the same place. Both lead to licensure. If you do a BArch, while you can become an architect already, you could opt to also get an MArch. Those who enter MArch degree programs with a BA are usually put in what is called the MArch I track and those who enter a MArch coming in with a BArch degree are put in an MArch II track. The MArch II track is shorter in duration since those with a BArch already have a professional degree.</p>
<p>If one earns a BArch, then the only reason to add the MArch is if you really like school or intend to teach. For practical application, the BArch is all you need towards licensure as an architect.</p>
<p>The other thing to remember is that you have to participate in the Intern Development Program (IDP) through NCARB (National Council of Architectural Registration Boards) after you graduate. Depending on the degree you have, the number of years of IDP before qualifying to sit for the exam differs, but in terms of time, it's a bit of a trade-off. But archiemom is correct. Also, go for an MArch if there's some particular kind of research you'd like to get into or if you want to go more indepth in an intellectual pursuit prior to getting work experience. The first xx years of work experience are important (you'll learn things you don't get in school), but not necessarily 'intellectual'!</p>
<p>queen-"another one bites the dust"</p>
<p>anyways, archkid</p>
<p>you better make sure you ARE POSITIVE, I MEAN, ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that you are passionate about architecture. Do keep in mind the bitter truth of low-salary, but that shouldn't be your concern.</p>
<p>People have said that a 5 year B.arch program is more rigorous than B.A program. Going to a B.A is less rigorous, and thus give you opportunities to explore other majors if you are in doubt of staying. Thus, my point is, cutting Berkeley is a bad choice.</p>
<p>Dear archkid,
I am glad that you know what you are heading to. Architecture is a heartbreaking business if not a brutal education. The making of a women architect does not allow a faint of heart, to point out a sad sociological fact that women will make 66% of what men make by doing the same job is one more reason to consider choosing a 4-year program over a 5-year route. Because guys can make same amount of money by obtaining a bachelors degree from a state university as ladies working super hard by getting a masters degree from an Ivy graduate school. You've got to be 1000% positive to commit yourself to architecture, or it is simply not for you.</p>
<p>Going off of what fallinwater just said, in the business of architecture, like in the sciences profession, women often have to work twice as hard and be twice as innovative to obtain credit (or grants etc). So it's a commitment not to simply work super hard by getting a masters at an Ivy, but also a commitment to sticking it out in the gendered workplace</p>
<p>Thanks, I think I'm able to breathe now that things got clearer.</p>
<p>There are a few schools (University of Kansas and I think Kansas State starting next year) that have a 5 year MArch degree. According to KU, you enter the program just like a 5-year BArch program but get a MArch degree without the BArch. Also according to KU website, they state it is actually 5 1/2 years but the 1/2 year can be study abroad, internship, working at an architecture firm during the summer. It can be done during the summer before your 5th year. Does anyone know more about their program.</p>
<p>Gender inequality, as I've addressed in my previous post, is the main reason that keeps me away from doing the BArch at USC. Unfortunately, my roomates (female architecture students) don't understand that. I always felt I can do whatever I want... until I started to face the cold reality of not having money to make my dreams happen.
"A great client deserves a great architecture", an instructor told me, he asked, "Why don't you become a developer or at least find a developer husband or a banker or something like that?" If I were the person I once were, I would say, "What an insult!" But I am more aware of my situation than ever! I responded calmly, "You are right." This doesn't mean I become a submissive, brainless, anti-feminist, dumb girl, this means I am mature enough to make a CORRECT decision.I encourage other girls to do the same, IF YOU ARE SMART ENOUGH TO CRACK THINGS LIKE ARCHITECTURE, YOU ARE DEFINITELY HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO BECOME RICH! Do what you have to do so you can do what you what to do!</p>
<p>is an architect's salary really THAT low?</p>
<p>Go to archinect.com and click the "salary poll" section, see it yourself. On average, the starting salary is no more than $30,000 per year (that is, before tax) The starting salary at starchitecture firms is really pathetic unless you work for corporate firms such as SOM, KPF etc, your salary will not be comparable to that of an engineer. Again, women architects make 2/3 of what men architects make. Please take that into consideration.</p>