is it worth it?

College Majors Architecture Major
1

<p>is it worth it?</p>

<p>i am in my second semester. last semester wasn't so bad; now its only been three weeks and i want to shoot myself. i feel like what i am doing has no purpose behind it. </p>

<p>i guess the awe of feeling awesome when i have an amazing review has worn off now that im questioning why i am trying so hard to please people for five minutes as we rush to get reviews done. why am i spending so much money on supplies, why i am spending so much time on things.</p>

<p>do you actually learn anything from this program? i understand it's a major where you basically teach yourself and learn by trial and error but all i am getting from my time in the program is what materials can be cut with what, how to change the drill bits in the wood shop and how to bs my way through a review. </p>

<p>the way it's set up this semester, my design studios no longer collaborate so we have something due everyday with the minimal amount of time to work on it. it is impossible to avoid all nighters for me since i have classes until 4 or 5 every day. something due on tues, work on it on monday because on the weekend i was working on what was due monday. get a new project on monday after review, part of it is due wed. work on it on tuesday, when we get another assignment due thursday. but i cant start that because i have to finish the project we got on monday and complete it for friday. the cycle never ends.</p>

<p>what is the point? is it worth slaving in studio for hours and hours every day? do you profit in the long run? or is this all completely pointless? how does this stuff apply to real architecture?</p>

<p>i am not sure it is worth being exhausted all the time.
i am not sure i can survive another semester like this.</p>

2

<p>OK, I’ll take a stab at this on the condition that you realize I’m not an architect, just the parent of an arch student.</p>

<p>

My son and I discussed this once. In my opinion I blame it on the kindergarten “gold star” syndrome - kid brings home some crappy fingerpainting and shows me how it earned him a gold star when both he and I know he was just messing around with paint and paper. This progresses through the years to the point that the actual work is secondary to getting the “gold star”. I bet your work is at times awesome, and sure, everyone likes an ego boost, but this should be about building a personal knowledge base, experimenting and improving every day.</p>

<p>

Why indeed? Chasing the gold star (or grade)? Shouldn’t this be about learning from mistakes, not just yours, but all your classmates * and * the professor when he/she just gets it wrong? —I noticed you called the crits ‘reviews’. I say they are called critiques for a reason. They are blunt comments on the project as presented, intended to point out errors and omissions and occasionally brilliance. Just think what a fantastic learning tool that is. Soon as the dust settles after a crit I would imagine you’d be re-energized to tackle the next project.</p>

<p>

If you’ve been paying attention you already have. Go back and look at your work from last fall. Critique it now with a more experience eye, then imagine how much better it will be as the semesters roll by.</p>

<p>

This stuff has to be covered. To make models you have to manipulate materials. Everyone enters the program with different levels of dexterity and hand to eye skills, and different understanding of tools and tool safety. Get this out of the way and those models will continue to get better.</p>

<p>

Personally I think this is a good thing, especially early on the learning curve. Working together or in groups may result in a superior project, but it stifles individual creativity. </p>

<p>

Do some reading up on time management skills. Learn to just get the projects done well within a limited time frame, then bring them in as is for crits, and take your knocks. You don’t need the gold star, you need to have every fault pointed out so you can improve. Keep in mind if you could “get it right” first time / every time you wouldn’t need the program!</p>

<p>

Ah but this too shall pass. Then you’ll be longing for the good old days.</p>

<p>

Seems to me that it’s a very effective way to expose you to a huge amount of knowledge in a very compressed time frame.</p>

<p>

That is something I am totally unqualified to comment on. Anyone else care to?</p>

<p>

Betcha can.
Some time management.
Realization that you’re getting better at it.
Come up for air occasionally and see that there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
Blah, blah, blah…</p>

<p>Come on, you should be enjoying this process…</p>

3

<p>You do seem to be completely overwhelmed with your schoolwork. And I can’t comment on whether the load is unreasonable compared to other arch programs, or how it was 30 years ago when I was in the BArch program. But 4trees is correct in that you need to conquer the time management issue. This is one area in which arch programs DO prepare you for the real world…Deadlines, Deadlines, Deadlines. And often on more than one project and at various stages of completion, for more than one project manager.</p>

<p>One way students get through it all is to love, love, love architecture. If you’ve lost the passion, it will be difficult to overcome the stress of the all-nighters and the critical reviews.

</p>

<p>Only you can answer this, as it is your career and your future.</p>

4

<p>I’m going to take the contrarian view, and agree with the OP. BTW…I’m an architect. I think the training in many archi. schools does the student a disservice. I TOTALLY agree, that if you love the field and the work, it won’t matter. Time management is also critical. However, I think it has gotten worse over the years. Today’s studios seem to demand far more time that when I went to school. There is more to learn than ever, and the time spent in school has only increased slightly (maybe a 6 year instead of 5 year degree). Studio demands full emersion, and as a result, produces students who rarely have a life outside the field during their college years. Yes, there are exceptions, but more rare than not. Architects are often thought of as being elitist designers instead of problem solvers and collaborators. They are losing ground (and work) to other professions…drafting services, Design/Buiild firms whose managing partners are typically not the art-trained designers, developers, contractors, etc. It is a common “joke” that the lights are always on in studio, except it is not a joke. We should be encouraging cross-curricular training and classes. We should encourage students to have a life outside of studio, where they will interact with all types, and perhaps even meet future clients and partners. We should encourage a love of the field but not by slave labor! The trend continues even in the workplace, as young interns often work for numerous hours for little pay.</p>

<p>I think studio environment has taken a wrong direction, just as medical training did when the crazy hours were enforced for medical interns. It is a dangerous practice in both fields. There are SO many facets to the architecture profession, I think schools who focus solely on design studios (by demanding so much time that all the other classes suffer), are doing both the student and the profession a disservice. </p>

<p>I think we are heading in the wrong direction and need to step back and re-think the current model used in architecture studios & many schools. Now if anyone could only tell me how to do that!</p>

<p>Sad thing is that I think it is a wonderful profession, with so much variety and promise!</p>