<p>Hi guys I'm an architecture student looking to apply for top architectural undergrad universities and right now the two schools that i am deciding between are Cornell university and Bartlett UCL. I would like to hear from some expert on which one to pick assuming that i get accepted by both.</p>
<p>I have went to the cornell summer camp for high school students and honestly i didn't quite enjoy it as much. Why? well its because i found the cornell way of architecture way to practical for me. by this i meant that everything is some what traditional, starting with the fact that there is much more emphasis on the function, material, and ergonomics(which i know arevery important in architecture) but somewhat lacking in terms of the design (traditional/conservative yet practical yenno ) anyways i didn't enjoy this aspect of it and an architect i really look up to is Zaha with her post modernism, which i did not experience during the camp. However, UCL Bartlett is less of that and more focused on the fine art renderings, flexibility, and design of conceptual architecture while caring less about the ergonomics etc.</p>
<p>i totally realize this but i have always believed in the concept of becoming a wild beast (in terms of creativity/ design) and then getting tamed (then studying the rules of architecture more: setting boundaries on which design is more practical). because of this, i would prefer the choice of going to UCL for the design and then back into the US for masters in places such as Columbia etc where designs are less "imaginative." so conclusion: design --> Practical</p>
<p>My parents on the other hand are very against this due to the fact that apparently the UK is currently in decline. they want me to go to a top university that is also very good in arch. frankly speaking, cornell matches my parents expectations. Me on the other hand believes that UCL also matches this criterion since UCL is a top notch school with a famous architecture department.</p>
<p>Anyways so the message is which path should i take? Am i folly for wanting to go to UK (where according to people is deteriorating) and take a design approach to architecture first or should i consider going to the US for the fame ivy league can give me despite the fact that i don't like the approach to architecture particularly at cornell?</p>
<p>I would like to ask you University/Architecture gurus' opinions on which route is a better choice despite the fact that I'm favouring UCL. Thanks a lot for patiently reading this long question! Any feedbacks would be truly valuable and impacting!</p>
<p>I’m not that familiar with Cornell’s career discovery program, especially how it compares in curriculum and focus to Cornell’s BArch program. I can tell you, though, that Cornell architecture school, while not an art school, is definitely design driven. The studio is the epicenter.</p>
<p>You need to bear in mind that the undergraduate architecture degree offered by Cornell is the BArch, a professional degree, that would allow you to become a licensed architect. By definition, the BArch must cover the practical and structural side of architecture. The undergraduate degree offered by Bartlett is the BSc, bachelor of science with a design focus. These are two different animals (not to mention the difference between London and Ithaca!).</p>
<p>The cost of getting a BA/BS + MArch can be considerably greater than just getting a BArch. You want to make sure that you and your parents are on the same page financially, so put prestige aside for a moment and talk about money.</p>
<p>Financials aside the combination of a BSc from Bartlett and an MArch from an American school would get you where you want to go. The thing is that there are so many educational options that lead to succeed in architecr ture, so you shouldn’t limit yourself to just these two.</p>
<p>It seems that you and your parents have different perspectives – UK vs US, design focus vs professional focus, Ivy League prestige vs inside architecture prestige. Once you get clarity on the money, perhaps you could look at some other possibilities, such as art school (like RISD or Pratt) or architectural studies at a high profile university (like Brown or Princeton). </p>
<p>Unless one’s last name rhymes with Hadid, admission to any ‘good’ school of architecture is far from ‘pick school, mail deposit, and buy spiritwear’. I recently completed a very entertaining task as my older girl is ready to apply to grad schools. I collected GPA/GRE’s for schools as reported at GradCafe. As I expected, admissions to top schools were all over the place, meaning portfolio and rec letters are critical, as we all know, and that cost of attendance, no matter how we slice it, is an issue. An M.Arch at an Ivy League, without funding, is a rather expensive proposition. Not to mention 4 years in the UK paying non-EU rates. </p>
<p>My girl like me is dual EU/US citizen and there would be a lot of schools I would think to send her in Europe (we pay taxes there also so we get EU tuition). If you want to work in the USA after graduating doing a 4 year degree in Europe would be great followed by a USA M.Arch for licensing purposes. Europe has some pretty good arch schools (English speaking) </p>
<p>If Europe is in the cards, there’s a few more schools I would suggest, like TU Delft (the Dutch are the masters of the off-the-wall designs :-)), University of Edinburgh, UCL Bartlett, and a few others. There’s a list floating around.</p>
<p>@momrath Thanks for your feedback Finance isn’t really as big of as concern to my family compared to the value of education and how effective a route is for the future.</p>
<p>i definitely have considered othe possibilities and Cooper has always been up there in my list.</p>
<p>@turbo93 great suggestions! finance, though, isnt really a problem. The problem im concerned with is the chances of being accepted by the US schools if one is from UK. based on your stats and your knowledge, would someone from say UCL Bartlett have a lower chance of being accepted to a graduate school, say Columbia, compared to people who studied undergrad at, for instance, Cornell?i heard that there might be potential disadvantages because school like Cornell are indeed brothers with those top US graduate schools.</p>
<p>@momrath the only thing I don’t like about art schools is how I won’t have the opportunities to study minors like business etc but i really love the strength in Art schools’ designs and concepts since i enjoy Avant-garde much more than mainstream architecture :-S </p>
<p>You should ask Bartlett how their BSc grads do in US MArch admissions. Look at this list from Yale which gives the educational background of its MArchI & II classes.
<a href=“Pages - Yale Architecture”>Pages - Yale Architecture; II First</p>
<p>You will note quite a few degrees from non-schools, including Bartlett. I would think the same would be true of all of the top MArch programs. I can say that my son’s MArch program at Cornell was heavily international.</p>
<p>I think you may be underestimating the design emphasis at Cornell. The focus is certainly not mainstream. This is something you could ask about in depth when you have your interview.</p>
<p>Career discovery courses are pretty much watered down versions of architecture school, meant to appeal to a broad range of students who are interested in architecture careers. They don’t necessarily reflect the rigor and creativity that you would encounter in an actual BArch or MArch program. </p>
<p>Bear in mind too that even at an art school you would need to take structures, tech and environmental courses for a BArch. </p>
<p>It could be that you’re just not ready to commit to a BArch program at this time. If you do a BA or BS in architectural studies, art or anything else you may be interested in, you’d have a lot more flexibility both in your choice of college and in the range of courses you take. </p>
<p>Flash, finances may not be an issue but value (what you get for what you pay) is always an issue… </p>
<p>My daughter is a senior at a respected state flagship school that follows more of a ‘traditional’ approach, not the more conceptual (read, far out ) stuff you see coming out of places like Sci-Arc. So the challenge in an M.Arch is to find a school that’s compatible with how one was taught (if desired) and not having to learn a totally different culture. Some schools that are more to her style would include WUSTL, Oregon, Kansas, and so on. She has had classmates go to the Michigans and UCLA’s and Sci-Arc’s and the like and the invariably report a sizable difference in style. That’s critical and really the only way to find out is to super-research it and also visit. We’re doing that this fall before applications go in.</p>
<p>In some cases you find out by taking studios with professors who went to various schools and can tell you more. Said profs also bring colleagues for reviews / crits and so on so you quickly get the feeling of the styles being taught. Her favorite prof is from Cornell so… Others from Michigan, WUSTL, Oregon, and the like, so you quickly get an idea of what’s important for them.</p>
<p>I guess what I’m trying to say here is that find a super-respectable place to do your undergrad - and UCL is certainly a great place - then develop your own style then start thinking of where would be your best fit for that style.</p>
<p>One final thought - find out ahead of time what a typical overseas GPA looks like versus what’s expected from the grad schools. I attended college in Europe and there getting an 80% grade is kingly. I don’t remember anyone getting much more than an 85% for GPA in my college, ever. How this 85% translates into a 4.0 scale could be huge. </p>
<p>Cornell and Columbia too practical? Doing work like Zaha? Schools are notoriously trendy and in most schools doing work like Zaha is old school, I assure you they have moved on. If you want to be like Zaha, go to a good school (UCL or Cornell) work hard, learn the craft and perhaps over time you will develop your own voice. This is what got Zaha to where she is now: a very original vision.</p>
<p>If you just want to be a starchitect then go to Google, and see where the cutting edge designers went to school (probably Harvard, The AA, or the ETH in Zurich). That would be a good starting place for finding the best school. Then you need to spend time at a top firm, this is probably the most critical component. The current firm spinning off the most stars is OMA in Rotterdam. Once you have absorbed enough, start your own firm, win an international competition and you are on your way.</p>
Finance isn’t really as big of as concern to my family compared to the value of education and how effective a route is for the future.</p>