<p>How does this architecture program fare? I plan to ultimately work in New York City, and if I get my Barch at IIT and then get my MArch II at, say, Cornell, will this be enough?</p>
<p>Speaking of which, how competitive is Cornell’s professional design program and does an IIT grad stand a chance?</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>if you have a B.Arch, you don’t really need a M.ArchII unless you want to teach, or go back to school to learn some more</p>
<p>competitive as in admission or just the studio environment at cornell? it’s tough to get in…admission rates were in the single digits last year but the studio culture is very collaborative. competition is counter productive anyways</p>
<p>I guess what I am more interested in is, does anyone know of any successful architects who have graduated from IIT and then gone on to design amazing buildings in New York?</p>
<p>Thanks all.</p>
<p>This may not be applicable but I will give you my story. I spent the first two years of my architectural education at IIT in the 1970s. If the curriculum is anything similar to what I studied, it is not a curriculum that would lend itself to the design of any great buildings. I believe that it was a rigid Bauhaus philosophy with an extreme focus on materials and construction but only in a conceptual sense. There was also a profound inclination away from design exploration by way of the fact that you learned very quickly that you were graded as much on your presentation as on your design. What this meant was that if you did not know how you were going to present something than that was not an avenue of design that you were going to explore. This had a crippling effect on design creativity. The main body of the curriculum was four semesters of working in different materials: brick, wood, steel and concrete and by working I mean conceptual detailing, not design, along with many semesters of structural engineering (beam deflection with calculus) and miscellaneous 2 and 3 dimensional design courses. I left after two years but could see that you would not design anything you could call architecture until 4th year. By that time, you were so incredibly brainwashed/crippled that I don’t see how anyone coming out that curriculum could design anything. This might be OK as a graduate student after a good conceptual design B.Arch but as a main curriculum for students with very little prior knowledge, it was not good. I left and then graduated from Pratt Institute where I actually learned how to design and how to think in a conceptual manner (mostly thanks to Raimond Abraham). </p>
<p>My understanding that most of the students fed into SOM as production personnel. I do not know what it is like today, but I would look very carefully at the curriculum and ask what firms the graduates end up in.</p>
<p>I hate to sound so negative but IIT did me an incredible disservice in my architectural education. On top of that it was a school with an incredible lack of questioning by its students. They accepted everything that was taught to them without questioning anything that they learned. There was also no social life on campus as many students went home for the weekend. </p>
<p>I hope someone else can give you a more recent and positive take on the school but I just felt I needed to say what my experience was.</p>
<p>Google a number of the top firms in New York City. Search the partner’s profiles. I don’t think you will find IIT degrees but I could be wrong.</p>
<p>I say this over and over again, but architecture is a terribly regional profession. I haven’t lived my career this way, but in general, that is the essence of the profession. Most architects end up working in the city that is closest to their university. (I’m approximately 8500 miles from my university and this is the third urban location for my firm but I am a complete anamoly).</p>
<p>I never met an IIT grad while I worked for well-known New York architects or operated my own firm there. AlanArch’s analysis may explain why IIT grads weren’t present. New York is filled to the brim with the most fantastic design talent. Maybe IIT grads, limited by their program, couldn’t get a toe hold? I did meet a number of UCinncinati grads, UT grads and a hugely successful UHouston grad so there are success stories amongst the ‘provincials’ from the Great Flyover.</p>
<p>That said, if it is your passion to get to NYC, babu, you will get there from IIT. My advice would be to try to take your junior year aborad in New York–or London. Try to get summer work in NYC.</p>
<p>I was at IIT for a weekend, Spring 05, and there were info sessions on the various fields of study available. The Director told us that most graduates quickly find work in Chicago…</p>
<p>The Crown house was nice, and we learned that during the first year, we’d focus on the design and construction of the “brick house”. Students would draw by hand, and not computer, for that first year. And then on to other stuff later, like skyscrapers, and things. I’ve not been to Cornell, but of course, this looked way different…the student exhibitions looked great, and yeah, the air was thick with van der Rohe.</p>
<p>I couldn’t visit USC, Syracuse, and Wustl, the other programs I got into, but anyway, I took a gap year, applied to LACs.</p>
<p>Here at Wiliams, I’m currently taking drawing. There are also a couple of arch design courses I plan to take, as well various photography and painting classes. I may later decide to do a 3yr M.Arch if my interest is sustained to that point.</p>
<p>That is very demoralizing, but I am glad those who have experienced IIT have decided to speak the truth. I don’t want to become production personnel for SOM; in fact, my nightmare is that once I graduate I will end up in a corporate firm where occasionally I will be able to design a window or a column head. </p>
<p>That said, I am glad I applied to many other schools, including U of Cincinnati WUSTL, and others. I, too have not found any major NYC firms that carry IIT graduates, and in a book about current famous architects, only one was a student of IIT, and he had left early in its curriculum. </p>
<p>Judging from personal experience or what you have learned, can anyone tell me which of the following architecture programs offer the greatest outlet for creativity and New York city potential? I have purposely listed the more affordable programs on my list, as this is a major factor for me:</p>
<p>McGill University
Georgia Institute of Technology
University of Cincinnati
University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign
Ohio State University</p>
<p>I did not apply into the architecture programs at Cincinnati or Urbana; I did for the other three. I was wondering how bad this will end up being for me in the long run aka how difficult is it for me to transfer in. </p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
<p>Let me also add University of Michigan, Ann Arbor to that list.</p>
<p>you can learn a lot from designing a window or column…</p>
<p>I’ve heard good things about all of the programs you listed, apart from IIT. Name that would have street cred in NYC? Probably Cincy. The internship program there actually helps set up internships for the students, and many of them do their work in NYC, some even overseas.</p>
<p>As far as IIT, all the people I’ve talked to who went to IIT can be categorized one of two ways; either very unhappy with their experience there, or very defensive about why some people say it’s a bad school.</p>
<p>I knew an architect at a famous New York office whose sole job was to design the paving patterns for the office projects. I know another woman who spent three years organizing the doors for one building. Design takes a few months. Implementing the design for a $500M project takes ten years.</p>
<p>Here on earth, it is very very difficult to get design positions in big firms–and nearly impossible for women to get design positions in big firms. Women have to open their own offices if they want to design buildings. So says me.</p>
<p>I don’t think you lose much by applying to IIT still, then you can visit if you get in, and talk to students there and see how everything really is like. Their arch school has graduated hundreds of students, who are probably all working, though maybe not in New York.</p>
<p>But then, you don’t know what will happen later or during your arch studies. Just because IIT grads never worked in NY doesn’t mean you can’t, and how do you know you’ll still want to work in NY five years from now? IIT+Cornell sounds like a good plan, and even if the atmosphere at IIT is “crippling”, and students don’t question their profs, you can decide to be different and engage your profs intellectually as much as you want. Your experience is what you make of it, for the most part.</p>
<p>Every arch school has its unique heritage and philosophy. IIT’s is quite interesting and different. Some like it, some don’t. Other schools look at things in many other ways. In short, prestige counts, yes, no disputing that, but there’s no perfect arch school or one that has the formula to get you where you want. The perfect school is the one that suits you best, and it may not be IIT; it may not be Cincy either.</p>
<p>AlanArch, you made a great argument, but I don’t see how the not-that-great social life, according to you, contributed to doing you an “incredible disservice” to your architectural education.</p>
<p>Thank you, JRock. All of you have made very provoking arguments. I have visited IIT, and I did not mind the location or the people there. I don’t think the social life will be a problem for me. First and foremost, out of all the factors concerning a university, I desire the most that it have a top-notch program that promotes creativity and will land me a job in NYC. </p>
<p>I’m glad to hear that even though IITers are extinct or endangered in NY, if I work hard enough I can still get there. AlanArch, your description of the IIT curriculum is exactly the same as the curriculum currently in place, at least from the list of courses offered and their idea of teaching certain materials certain years.</p>
<p>AlanArch, I spoke to a professor there and he told me that most students who come in are very eager to just start designing and creating buildings, but that they need to first learn the foundations and do not usually design until forth year. This is a red flag for me; can you please give me a more detailed description of the types of projects you undertook while at IIT, and if any of them were practical ones (aka design). </p>
<p>Also, from your experience, is IIT a thinkthank for modernism, or does it also embrace other design ideas and innovative thinking?</p>
<p>Thank you all.</p>
<p>Babuskagirl, I can’t speak to any design philosophy inherent in the school beyond the Bauhaus. Research on the Bauhaus philosophy might help. I spent two years there and will try to remenber what my courses were.</p>
<p>Freshman year. The design courses related to using your equipment. Two dimensional exercises using a parallel rule, triangle and a curve; some of them using ink. There was probably an architectural history course which were boring lectures. Also one semester of Statics and one of Strength of Materials (engineering, lots of math). Starting in second year is the foundation of the curriculum which is four courses, one each semester, in brick, wood, steel and concrete. All these courses were technical in that they dealt with how to put materials together. Design was not an issue. Though these couses were four credits, they took 90% of your time, meaning at least 20 hours per week. I remember some two dimensional design classes alluding to three dimensions. More engineering courses; beam deflection with calculus. I suspect there were a few humanities classes thrown in. </p>
<p>As a student just out of high school, most students do not have the knowledge or maturity to understand what they are being taught and demand something else. It took me two years just to vaguely understand that I did not like this system. Again, if you are talking about anything related to architectural design, I didn’t see it until fourth year when you would have been so locked in to a train of thought that I don’t see how you could have been very creative by the definition I think you are using.</p>
<p>I will contrast this with the education I was exposed to at Pratt. First year deals with small creative assignments like designing a chair or a room that teaches you that design does not have to mean something practical. Subsequent years would have professors putting up the course titles the semester before and then choosing that course. Some of the courses dealt with more typical product type buildings that would also vary in scale from a house to some sort of planning project (not the scale I ever liked to work in). Other professors had more conceptual type courses that allowed you to work in a non-practical realm as a way to expand your conceptual thinking. I thought this was a very good way to teach, especially the freshman program. The one engineering teacher at the time was excellent. He had kids who were afraid to add 2+2, designing six story steel and concrete structures. One more little comment. I have found that most architects have a deficiency in understanding HVAC as it is very difficult to find good HVAC teachers and a friend of mine in technical publishing says that there are no goods books on the subject. I still think the McGuiness Stein book is used but does not help get a good feel for what systems are used in which product types. The only thing I ever understood, in school, was the 4-pipe office building. </p>
<p>To simply answer your question, none of the couses were practical for design. I don’t see how you could become a top-notch designer with this undergraduate curriculum. You would be very frustrated. Look very hard at where this education typically leads a graduate.</p>
<p>All this is my opinion from my direct experience and may not correspond to someone else’s experience.</p>
<p>Thank you, AlanArch. You have provided more information than I could have gotten otherwise, considering that I don’t know any architects, your information and everyone else’s is invaluable. </p>
<p>I’m going to rethink where I decide to attend; U of Cincinnati, which I also visited, did not offer me much insight because it was the weekend and everyone was gone, but I read somewhere in a ranking by DI that it is considered the “Most Innovative” architecture school. (If anyone is wondering, I obtained the information from University of Cincinnati’s wikipedia page, for what that is worth). Can anyone clarify this and whether or not this is not another myth?</p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
<p>Also, does anyone know how the University of Michigan’s program fares? Cheers or AlanArch, in your experiences have you worked with any architects from there and if so were they capable?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>UCinncinati is a great school and usually has a great faculty. They have maintained an edgy profile for a few decades now.</p>
<p>Look up the faculty profiles. An innovative school with a design focus will have a bunch of faculty with degrees from Cornell,Cooper, Sciarc, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Harvard, UCB, the AA etc. A non-design oriented school will primarily have faculty from it’s own school and state schools in neighboring states.</p>
<p>I looked up the faculty for Syracuse a few weeks ago and they appear to have an outstanding faculty at the moment. </p>
<p>Schools like Pratt in New York have great faculty–becuase so mnay talented architects want to live in New York.</p>
<p>Before you sign up for IIT, find out how many grads go on to Ivy MARchIIs. Compare that with UCincinnati.</p>
<p>My son is a soph in hs and wants to go into architecture. His list of schools are: BArch—Syracuse, Penn State, USC; MArch 4+2—UC Berkley, Cincinnati, U of Illinois Urbana Champaign. We live in the Chicago area. He wants to eventually work in a big city. He thought about Kansas (5 1/2 year MArch program). He is concerned Kansas isn’t near a major city for architecture. He spent time talking with a major architect in Phoenix about architecture and schools (the architect has his own firm). He mentioned to check schools that are practical versus theoretical. My sone wants practical. He was told Cornell is theoretical so eliminated Cornell from his list. Any comments about the above schools that he is considering.</p>
<p>Anyone else, please?</p>
<p>Well, I got the scholarship at IIT. Full tuition for five years, applicable for study abroad, too. Should I take it or see if there is any way I could attend the other schools I previously mentioned?</p>
<p>Thanks again.</p>