<p>I've always thought that it was required/expected for the arch students to take a graduate program in order to become architects.</p>
<p>However, having other posts on CC, it looks like it's either 5yr professional program vs. 4 yr pre-prof and 2 yr master.</p>
<p>Do firms prefer with architects with undergrad and grad education? Is it better to have grad program when taking the exams?</p>
<p>Again, I've always thought that it was 5+2 vs. 4+3 but now that I've found out, I no longer want to spend more money for another 2 years because the undergrad program at Carnegie Mellon is already expensive enough ($50k x 5).</p>
<p>I'll be waiting for replies. Thank you in advance.</p>
<p>The firms I’ve worked with didn’t care if you had a B.Arch or M.Arch, it was more a matter of your portfolio, your experience, and which school it was. We hired a lot of Cooper Union and Cornell grads with B.Arch’s and a lot of M.Arch’s from various schools. I also don’t think this is a distinguishing factor with respect to the exams. </p>
<p>The options are 5, 4+2, and 4+3 years. 4+3 assumes a liberal-arts or other non-architectural undergraduate degree, and 4+2 assumes an architectural (but nonprofessional) undergrad degree. Read up in the archives for many spirited discussions of the advantages/disadvantages of each. If you’re absolutely certain that architecture is the one and only career for you, the 5-yr B.Arch is the fastest route there.</p>
<p>For me the quality of the school and portfolio are significantly more important than MArch vs. BArch. We do not pay more for an MArch. However I just saw the newest DI compensation survey issue and they indicated that on average firms were paying about $6,000 more a year to recent graduates with an MArch ($42k vs. $48k). I think the BArch gives you the most flexibility. You can work and get registered, then have the flexibility to go back to school to get a three semester post graduate degree, typically an MS in Arch.</p>
<p>What do you mean by “quality of the school”? Does this mean only graduates from top schools are considered for the job? Assuming someone has a great portfolio and solid experience, would they get shut out because they came from a school wasn’t considered the best? (I’m currently getting my B.S.Arch at the University of Illinois)</p>
<p>No, it does not mean only the top schools are considered. It only means that the quality of the school matters more than if it is an MArch or BArch, and the quality of the student matters as much or more than the quality of the school.</p>
<p>Rick is exactly right. Obviously anyone is more impressed with a top-notch school than one s/he’s never heard of. But nothing compares with the quality of the actual person in front of you.</p>