I have found this and it truely scared me : http://qz.com/163984/if-you-want-a-job-dont-major-in-architecture/
I am an international student currently struggling with my portfolio and the thing is I dont know if I want to do architecture I am 17 like how am I supposed to know what to do with the rest of my life??
Can you guys tell me your opinions about this ? like is it worth all this trouble ?
Since you are an international student, have you checked your options in your home country?
You probably wouldn’t find a job here in the states, so your home options are probably better.
I looked at your link and the stats from the chart are from 09-11, not a great time for the construction industry, should be better now. Arch is not an easy money major. You will be required to have great stem stats and also have artistic talent, in my opinion, highly admirable. That said, without a passion for the field, 5 yrs + 2 yrs work experience for license (doctor without the guarantee) it should not be a major chosen without consideration.
Where I live its worse
Yes maybe but Ive read that it will go up by 4% in 2020 or something like that.
Thank you for the answers.
Yes, but if you are an international student, you have to find a US company that would be willing to sponsor you for a job and that doesn’t sound feasible.
The problem is that US companies have to tell immigration officials that there are no US candidates available for a job, before they can attempt to sponsor a non-citizen. So, you have to assume that you will return to your country for any future job prospects.
The US universities admit you as a guest student, they don’t admit you to immigrate.
@Dreamerinthemoon – Listen to aunt bea. Very few international students get to work in the US after their OPT.
In order to do so, they have to have a company willing to spend a lot of time and a lot of money to sponsor them for a work visa. American companies aren’t going to do that for an architecture graduate – they have plenty of Americans with nice portfolios looking for these same jobs.
And even if you find a sponsor, visas are still granted via a lottery, since there are more visa applications than visas.
Fact is, architecture isn’t like programming or engineering or complicated mathematical analysis – fields that are always looking for workers. If you want a good shot at working in the US after graduation, you need to go into a field where there is a shortage of qualified graduates. Architecture isn’t it.
So you re saying @katliamom @“aunt bea” That is if I want to stay in the us I need to find a field with a shortage of qualified graduates even tho I get into a great school like Cornell or MIT ?
Do you think that I should think of not going to the us because I m probably going to end up in my country and just study here ? Or do you think I should give up architecture and do something in STEM ?
Or maybe if you want a job in architecture after graduation, you go to Auburn:
What we are saying is that you shouldn’t count on staying in the US – even if you graduate from a top school.
The immigration system is designed in such a way that only a TINY percentage of international students can work here after their OPT. Those who luck out and find an employer willing to spend a lot of time and money to sponsor them for a work visa have sought-after skills (programming, engineering, etc.) in fields where there’s a worker shortage. But even then, getting a work visa isn’t guaranteed: there’s a lottery involved since there are fewer available visas than candidates.
Many international students discover that, after graduation, their only legal option to stay in the US is graduate school (which may involve lots of additional tuition money) or marriage to an American.
Exactly^.
If you plan on studying architecture and want to study in the US, then apply and study in Alabama at Auburn.
Assuming that you will be employed by a US company, will be a gamble that only you can assume. My dd2’s friend graduated with a degree in Architecture from USC and has not been very successful in locating a job. I’ll tell her about Alabama.
I’m an engineer in Maine. Architects are very busy up here! Construction is one of the most-improved fields in our economy. It’s just such an up-and-down industry, though. My husband is also an engineer. We have gone from making tons of money one year to standing in an unemployment line the next. Literally.
Interesting @MaineLonghorn. Where I live, Colorado, it’s also boom-and-bust in architecture, although many complain that architecture here is dominated by developers who use as few architects/engineers as humanly and legally possible.
I don’t know much about the architecture discipline, but I do know that here in Southern Cal, we are always busting at the seams with firms.
Every international student seems to want to live and work in Southern California.
In some (most/all?) states, licensed professional engineers can “sealed” architectural plans or do pretty much anything architects can do. In the real world, we have draftsmen develop architectural plans and pay a small fee to have the PEs seal their plans. Engineers who have acquired “good” architectural skills are better prepared than architects, providing full service to their clients, since they can design mechanical (HVAC), fire protection, and plumbing systems.
@dreamerinthemoon, Architecture jobs went through a bad spell after the 2008/09 financial meltdown but are now quite stable. Articles like the one you referenced are out of date. An American national graduating from a reputable architecture program who has built up a resume of internships and summer jobs, has a reasonably good prospect of finding work as an architect.
For a non-American, the situation is less straight forward, but I would say that about most professions. Yes, architecture firms – small and large – do hire and sponsor non-Americans. It’s not easy, though, and it’s certainly not guaranteed.
In America, there are two paths to a professional architecture degree. The undergraduate path is the Bachelor of Architecture (BArch) which is offered by about 45 universities. The BArch is generally a 5.0 year program and is narrowly architecture focused.
The other path is a combination of any undergraduate degree – a BA or BS in architecture, architectural studies or ANYTHING ELSE – plus a Master of Architecture (MArch). The MArch takes 2.0 to 3.5 years depending on the undergraduate degree. This path is better for students who are not entirely sold on architecture as a career. It allows for more academic flexibility than the BArch, but as it takes longer, it may cost more.
Either way, with a BArch or an MArch, it takes about 3.0 years after graduation to complete the process to become a licensed architecture. There are exceptions, depending on the state in which you practice, but for maximum flexibility and maximum income you’ll want to be licensed.
Entry level salaries for architects are low relative to the investment in education. For sure there are other professions that pay better, but if you want to practice architecture, then the fastest and simplest approach is to study architecture.
Of the two schools you mention, Cornell and MIT, only Cornell offers the BArch. Cornell architecture is a highly competitive and highly regarded program. Many international students who graduate with a BArch or MArch from Cornell do indeed manage to work as architects in the U.S.
MIT’s undergraduate degrees in architecture are Bachelors of Science in architecture and in architectural studies. With either of these 4.0 year degrees you would still need to get an MArch in order to become a licensed architect in the U.S. As an international, you would be less likely to be sponsored with a BS than a BArch.
Uh…no @Jamrock411 .
This is absolutely not true. I am a construction project manager and I hire both engineers and architects on a regular basis.
Here is the truth: Architects focus on whole building design. When I am building a new building, one of the first steps is to hire the architect. I get the architect and the owner together to discuss the owners vision for what they want in a new building. The architect then puts this into a sketch (a concept drawing). Once the owner accepts the concept I request sealed plans from the architect. The architect draws the “architectural” portion of these plans (The aesthetic items). The architect then sub contracts a variety of different engineers to produce engineering plans. A civil, mechanical, and electrical engineer will all produce different sections of the plans. Then the architect turns back over to me the completed set of plans. The architects duties also extend to approving change orders, pay applications, and acting as go between with contractors. The architect designs what the building will “look” like and the engineers design the mechanical and structural systems.
In short, an architect is involved with the whole process whereas an engineer only touches one small piece. When you look at a set of as builts or blue prints, the name and credentials that you will see on the front page are always those of the architect and never the engineer. I have never come across an engineer who I felt could do the work of an architect. If you used an engineer to design a building you would end up with one ugly building.
I will be writing a more detailed article on this soon at www.the-undergrad.com.
Joe Earl, www.the-undergrad.com