Hello, wise friends!
I have completed two years of my 5-year undergrad architecture degree at the University of Arkansas, and am applying to transfer to either USC, Sci-Arc, Otis College of Art and Design, or Woodbury.
Adhering to every school’s application guidelines, I submitted a portfolio of my best creative work done outside of my architecture program. Because I was skeptical of how a school could consider me for 2nd or third year without any evidence of my studio work, I made a second portfolio of architecture projects from each semester as well as some creative work.
To be frank, I think my creative portfolio is significantly better than my architectural portfolio. So much so that I worry my chances of getting into Sci-Arc or USC will be greatly affected, and not in a positive way. So far, Otis and Woodbury have asked that I send an architecture portfolio to be considered instead of my creative portfolio, which is why I assume every college will be asking for this. Woodbury went ahead and accepted me as a first year, since I have yet to send them my studio work. I don’t think they would have offered me such a good scholarship had they seen my architectural portfolio instead of the creative one. It seems smarter to stick with my creative portfolio, which has more scholarship potential, than to submit my studio work and hope to get accepted into third or second year. I understand how convoluted this is, but if you have an opinion, I’d love to hear it.
I’m asking this on a financial basis. Would it be financially smarter to apply as a first year with a scholarship-worthy “art” portfolio, or cross my fingers and send a basic architecture portfolio, hoping I’m transferred into second or third year?