<p>Imagine a young person. Who is a first year architecture student. And is questioning her commitment to Architecture. And who would consider engineering (with interest mainly in civil and enviro) but who fears that engineering (as a career) will be dry and uncreative. Assume the person is decent in math (5 on BC calc as a HS junior) and not super artsy, but thoughtful, wide interests, strong aesthetic sense, quirky, idealistic, etc.</p>
<p>It would be useful to this young person to know if there are opportunities to be creative in the field, if being creative is rewarded, etc, etc.</p>
<p>I am not sure if this is helpful or not, but…</p>
<p>My husband started out as an architecture major at Tulane. After one semester, he switched to mechanical engineering because he was not “super artsty” and more analytical.</p>
<p>When we met, I was a creative supervisor at an advertising agency. On a date early in our relationship, I made a comment about avoiding engineers in college because they were not creative. Very calmly, he said to me, “you don’t think it took creativity to design the Golden Gate bridge? Or to imagine how to move cars on and off 8 lanes of traffic seamlessly without causing accidents? Or to design the infrastructure for a skyscraper?”</p>
<p>Since then, I have never questioned the creativity of an engineer.</p>
<p>I think the Burj Khalifi is creative, as are those twin skyscrapers in Kuala Lumpur and the Bahrain WTC. YMMV. I also think the way they design buildings to stand earthquakes is creative.</p>
<p>I’m certain there are a lot of other examples.</p>
<p>Several of the smartest, most creative people I know dropped Arch for civil engineering.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: I’m a civil engineer.</p>
<p>It’s such an enormous joy to go see an interchange you’ve designed, or a bridge, or a building, and think to yourself “I designed that.”</p>
<p>Has she thought about Architecture Engineering? It combines structural engineering with some components of arch and doesn’t entail the endless studio hours.</p>
<p>Well, considering I’m typing this from my office as I’m taking a break from prepping a presentation (on having to be creative with site development) to my local American Society of Civil Engineers chapter…</p>
<p>I have been in civil engineering for less than 5 years (midlife career change), so I think I can speak for current job conditions. My work is all about creativity… how to fit this building in that space, how to not flood the site, how can we attain LEED certification, how to handle an increase in traffic.</p>
<p>As an aside, and maybe not even relevant here: I have friends that are architects, even some with MArch degrees, and not one has been able to find any kind of steady work beyond short contract jobs here and there. I do think job outlook needs to be taken into consideration as well.</p>
<p>there are many considerations - reasons to stay and to go, and DD is aware of them. This is one aspect of the decision where she could use some help.</p>
<p>IMO one of the central aspects of engineering is creativity. This is true for virtually all branches of engineering including the branches mentioned, EE, ME, computer science, and others. Creativity and then making that ‘new design’ work is what engineering is all about.</p>
<p>I am a civil/environmental engineer and I have an art background. I love doing site design, permitting, working a project on AutoCad, developing new spreadsheets for project or utility management. My brother is also a civil, and he is in pig heaven when he gets to design or redesign portions of a golf course. It’s mostly creative. Work is slow for Civils right now, but even slower for architects. The two professions work together quite a lot. Important for civils and architects is good spatial reasoning and the ability to visulize objects in 3D. If you don’t have that, electrical or chemical might be a better bet.</p>
<p>I have to admit, in my branch of architecture - renovations and additions - it’s more about problem solving than creativity of the sort they seemed to want in architecture school. A big part of the job is communicating with clients and dealing with building departments and contractors.</p>
<p>I have the same question, actually, for my younger son, who is a junior in high school. He claims he wants to be an architect, but given the economic climate, the difficulty getting into an achitecture program, getting through the program, getting a job, etc., it seems pretty bleak as a career for him. So, he is considering engineering. Are there a lot of “frustrated architects” out there who are engineers and regret never becoming architects?</p>
<p>I’m not an engineer, but as a reporter who covers municipal governments, all of whom employ civil engineers either on staff or as consultants, I can attest to the importance of having creative talent in that field. Civil engineers are problem-solvers, and not all of the problems come out of textbooks. Many of the problems call for creative solutions.</p>
<p>Unless you are the next Frank Lloyd Wright, I’d be less impressed by your creativity than by your practical problem-solving. I want my new building to look good, yes, but also be energy- efficient, built for real humans to use, and not flood in the rainy season or fall down in high winds. :D</p>
<p>And engineering is ALL about problem solving. :)</p>
<p>PS. I can think of one campus that has a couple of “creative” buildings that just don’t work, designed by architecture graduates of that campus. oops.</p>
<p>I always thought that one has to be creative and resourceful to be an engineer. But it also requires to enjoy technical stuff. Math alone will not do it. I have quit engineering after 11 years of experience. I did not like it, went to field because of my love for math, it did not work. I discovered that technical aspect of things just do not interest me. I switched to Computer Science and love it. I really do not care how computer works (after being EE for 11 years!), I love writing software on any platform and they are very different.</p>
<p>"I have to admit, in my branch of architecture - renovations and additions - it’s more about problem solving than creativity of the sort they seemed to want in architecture school. "</p>
<p>DD is very much more interested in Arch as problem solving than starchitect style arch as conceptual art. Our understanding is that the profession is more that way (IE more practical)than the schools are, and that RPI is more that way than some other Arch schools. She is basically okay with “practical creative” though she would like a touch of artsy I think. She does care about how buildings LOOK, and she is enjoying Building Thinking Arch, the non studio intro arch course. </p>
<p>Right now, taking into account the salaries and career issues, IF she was convinced that she could combine arch studio with having a life in college, she would stick with Arch. However given teh economic issues of Arch, shes thinking its not worthy sacrificing so much to get through the program. I am of course leaving it to her to make life decisions (while letting her now of the need for her to be self sufficient financially) but trying to provide supplementary info (which may improve her decision making, and also can relieve her anxiety simply by letting her know there is a workable alternative, even if she never takes it).</p>
<p>not worthy = not interested.
UG’s are accomplishing amazing results without sacrificing anything. They find out that the more they are involved with everythiing, the better it is for them and their major and future. As busy as Arch. are, I do not think that they are busier than engineers. pre-meds and many others who have fun, having great experiences within academics and outside while being greatly challenged by demands of their major and requirement of very high GPA. Great number of them pursuing their interests well outside of their major, by having double/triple majors and minors, going abroad, being part of Greek, doing Research, volunteering and just being part of college life. They cannot afford not to explore as they are going to have very busy lives after UG and they know that.</p>
<p>^For what it’s worth, I’ve actually found my branch of architecture quite recession-proof. When people aren’t selling houses they are fixing them up instead! If the economy truly tanks I’ll be in trouble, but so far I’ve actually gotten busier with each downturn.</p>
<p>I had a roommate in the architecture program at RPI. He was busier than the engineering students about 1 week each month as project submissions loomed. He had more free time the other 3 weeks. Switching to Civil Eng would not give your daughter more free time. </p>
<p>The opportunity for artistic creativity in architecture is a factor of ten greater with architecture than with civil engineering.</p>
<p>one week each month? Well. When she called she was under the impression it would be EVERY weekend. This last one was an assignment given on a thursday, due on a monday.<br>
Its possible this is what the Dean told her on Monday, which led her to decide to stick it out to the end of the semester at least. Certainly she will know more then.</p>
<p>Re creativity - I understand it wont be as much as in Arch. I guess I wanted to know if there will be any at all, if it varies with sub fields of civil, different employers, etc, etc.</p>
<p>“not worthy = not interested” Typo, I meant to say not worth it.</p>
<p>Im not sure that engineering is equally time consuming to arch - IIUC it differs from campus to campus, and what I have heard (not only from my DD), contra magnetron, is that at RPI archies DO work more than the engineers. But anyway, thats something DD can best find out on campus. Im not asking CC for help on that. I am asking CC for ideas about civil e (and also environmenal eng)</p>
<p>Bbd, there is an interesting book by David Billington called “The Tower and the Bridge, the new art of structural engineering”, where he argues the creative aspect of engineering. It’s only about 300 pages, and your D might find it interesting from an architectural aspect and from a decision on major aspect. </p>
<p>As for structural engineering, yes there is room for creativity, once you work your way up a ways. But it is true of architecture as well that you have to work your way up, often for a LONG time. I knew a number of architects who spent their early years drawing toilet partitions and doing renderings of someone else’s design. Most of the ones I knew worked to interpret the designs of others into fact. Very few architects actually get to be the primary designer on major projects. A project may have many architects working on it, but usually only one of them is the principal designer. </p>
<p>Some negatives to consider regarding structural engineering: It is one of the most stressful professions out there. In economic downturns, structural engineers are often the first to get laid off. It may not lend itself well to part time employment (ex. for someone who might want to be a pt stay-at-home mom). All of these things add up to the reason I left the profession 17 years ago.</p>