<p>I am confused with which school to pick and with the deadline quickly approaching I need to make up my mind soon. Any advice would be deeply appreciated.</p>
<p>Money-wise they will all cost about the same because of the different scholarships. This was my number one factor in deciding but since they are all around $30,000 it's harder to decide.
I like the idea that I would be able to graduate earlier with a 5 year degree (cheaper) but I'm not entirely set on architecture so a 4+2 would be better if I decided to branch out.
UO would be the closest (from Alaska), and I have relatives there so it has the best location. Also, I love the area because of its mountains.
As for the programs, I know Notre Dame is focused on traditional and WUStL seemed more modern. Does anyone known about UO? Also, an architect I chatted with told me that Notre Dame has a bad rep among architects so I'm kind of worried about that. It might have just been because he worked in a modern architecture firm. Personally I can see myself more grounded in contemporary/traditional architecture but I like modern as well. I enjoy smaller schools + class sizes and smaller cities.
I know WUStL and Notre Dame are higher ranked univiersities and UO is just a public school but does this fact matter much if each of their architecture programs are ranked high? </p>
<p>Last question first, it does not matter if one university is public, so long as its architecture school is well-respected. </p>
<p>Then, Notre Dame is held in high regard imho but there is definitely the traditionalist aspect of it. And many modernist architects have issues with that. </p>
<p>If you’re not entirely decided upon architecture, the 4+2 option is definitely preferable. And about which school to attend: I’d consider where you think you might want to live and work afterward. True, many people switch coasts upon graduation, but many more end up in the local area, particularly in the major cities. Their degrees are recognized there and there are considerable local cohorts of graduates already in place.</p>
<p>I don’t know much about architecture, but wouldn’t you expect modern architects to be in higher demand than traditional/classical ones? This may be a silly question, so my apologies. Also, I was told that ND students do all drafting by hand for the first 1-3 years and only learn to use CAD or whatever the drawing software is after that. There must be a reason for this, because I was completely baffled when I heard it.</p>
<p>Contemporary = Modern (in the literal sense of the word).</p>
<p>Also, modernism is a style that many architects ran from years ago! And so did the public!</p>
<p>I’m not so sure I’d worry too much about the style an architecture school teaches unless it is specifically what you want to draw and play with. When you get out into the real world, you’ll see it’s almost meaningless in most firms…assuming you can even find a job in architecture…</p>