<p>I’m curious…I see that Notre Dame is in the top ten undergraduate programs according to Design Intelligence. I already know where I am going to school, but I was wondering if there is any innovation at this school. How did it make the list?</p>
<p>don’t go to a school based on ranking. the design intelligence rankings are not a very reliable source for quality of architecture schools. </p>
<p>the curriculum of notre dame is geared very much towards historic architecture i believe…</p>
<p>yea, lots of historic stuff. it REALLY turned me off.</p>
<p>i LOVE the classics, but that doesn’t prepare you for a career in modern design, imo.</p>
<p>The ranking is a result of practitioner surveys. Therefor, this could be affected by any little whim of the populace, i.e. that they like Notre Dame football so decide to rank the school highly.</p>
<p>I’m half joking there, I hope that’s not the reason… the more likely case is that lots of people who work in residential construction and prefer revival styles rank the program highly because they prepare them well for the business of re-hashing old ornaments in cheap materials. So they score highly with people who do that sort of thing.</p>
<p>I am one of the practicioners surveyed in DI. I think it is a pretty good survey. I know Jim Cramer, the man who runs it, is very thoughtful, and I doubt many traditional homebuilders get surveyed. The most suspect part of the rankings are probably some of the biggest name schools. I know the schools in the South/Southwest pretty well. We recruit there, we know the professors, and we see the portfolios. So when I rank UT Austin, UT Arlington or Rice highly it is because I know those programs well. However you are asked to rank a lot of schools.</p>
<p>I haven’t seen a Cornell grad since I left NY 14 years ago, they just don’t come down here very often. I still rank the school highly because of the reputation it had when I was in NY. Same for Harvard or Yale. I am not going to rank Texas A&M ahead of Columbia even if I haven’t seen the Columbia students in a few years. So I would suggest the bigger the name the more suspect the ranking.</p>
<p>Notre Dame is supposed to be an outstanding program. Very focused, with graduates who have done very well in the field. The work is not my cup of tea, But I would not deny the quality of the program. I have been around enough to have gained a little perspective. I cannot tell you what the profession will be focused on ten years from now, but I can guarantee you it will not be what we are focused on now. </p>
<p>Regards,
rick</p>
<p>I just find it so unusual that architects (if they can call themselves that) would ever want to attend Notre Dame. I mean, that school lacks the spirit and soul of architecture, the innovation and creativity and most people who go into this field desire.</p>
<p>That’s what I was wondering.</p>
<p>It is just a different philosophy at Notre Dame than in most other schools. Can’t there be innovation and creativity within a frame of thought. </p>
<p>Don’t read too much into The Fountainhead, that book was just Ayn Rand’s way of fighting imaginary enemies in order to promote her own extremist philosophy. Corbusier, Mies, Johnson and the Smithsons all looked back at the past, they just read it differently than the Beaux-Arts tradition would have dictated. In a sense, isn’t Beaux-Art-like representational design a way of innovating when most schools are using complex forms to a large degree separated from function and narrative?</p>
<p>I’m just saying, don’t be so quick to judge.</p>
<p>babu, differents strokes different folks. Very few architects pursue a high design career. For every post on CC, there are 20 lurkers. Thus, for someone who expects to be well known ;), it doesn’t pay to bad mouth a program.</p>
<p>DI rankings are only helpful by region. National rankings are a waste of time, IMO.</p>
<p>Personally, I believe the profession will be focused on very smilar things in 10 years time, namely, breaking the barriers of design, materials and sustainability with the help of cutting-edge computer technology.</p>
<p>My apologies. Now that I look back on what I wrote I realize that I may have come off as a bit snotty. I did not mean that, nor do I consider Notre Dame’s school of architecture a bad program, especially for people who are interested in revival styles. In fact, for this particular narrow field of interest, Notre Dame is probably top-notch. </p>
<p>It’s just that, what drew me to architecture, and what I hope would draw most people to this profession, are the infinite possibilities for ever square inch of space to reinvent, recreate, redesign, and the ability to leave your own imprint on a building, not borrow line by line styles and buildings that have already been built. That’s almost like plagiarism. </p>
<p>I realize we must take everything with a grain of salt, Ayn Rand, Notre Dame, or otherwise.</p>
<p>im actually very interested in notre dame’s architecture as ive expressed previously on this forum. i love art, but am VERY into tradition. i absolutely hate modern and contemporary art and the futuresque look. yes, i know, the world is changing and i have to be willing to accept change. however, does anyone believe there are career opportunities for someone in my situation?</p>
<p>I’ve been accepted to Notre Dame for fall 07 as a freshman, and I happened upon this topic. I’ve been interested in architecture for a long time, but I basically gave up on it as a possible career due to all of the negative i’ve been reading recently. however, i’m really starting to think more about it and am realizing that the money is not a big deal to me, as long as i enjoy my job and have security. other than that, i like ND’s approach to arch. As a previous poster said, I also believe that architecture will not be what it is now 10-20 years from now, and ND addresses that in a letter from their dean of studies on their website. he talks about ND’s approach being able to critique what architecture is now with what is used to be, and so come to a conclusion of what it “should be.” also, the previous poster’s ?'s werent answered, and i’m probably not the one to do it so any input on my little rant or jonoam’s would be great. thanks guys.</p>
<p>also, does anyone have any idea about the job placement that ND’s arch. students get? are they quality firms? mainly in the north?thanks</p>
<p>University of Cincinnati has a fabulous architecture program that is very highly ranked and higher ranked than that of Notre Dame RICE and CMU. It provides guaranteed PAID coops as part of their program and the tuition is much cheaper than that of Notre Dame even without taking the coop pay into account. Am I missing something?</p>
<p>if you want job security in a highly unstable field, cornell is probably the best way to go. from what i hear, notre dame’s arch school seems to be focused on classical architecture…which might limit yourself to what you can do with the degree and who will hire you…this is just my own speculation though</p>
<p>taxguy-rankings are useless…i would take them with a grain of salt. i would very much rather go to Rice than UC.</p>
<p>Sashimi46, I do agree that overall rankings of schools leaves a lot to be desired. However, I have found that rankings of specific programs do have some validity especially when they are based on either peer reviews or employer input. Cincinnati has very high rankings from both sectors.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t take Cincinnati for anything other than Music and Design/architecture.However, for those two areas, they are superlative. Ask any architect or check out any architectural firm about the reputations of Cincinnati vs. Notre Dame.</p>
<p>UCincinnati has historically been a good school but their faculty list <a href=“http://www.daap.uc.edu/people[/url]”>http://www.daap.uc.edu/people</a> isn’t impressive. The fact that a signficant number of faculty haven’t bothered to post their credentials is also a disappointment.</p>
<p>All in all, I would not call the UC program ‘fabulous’–nor do I think the ‘profession’ uniformly has a negative impression of Notre Dame. Notre Dame attracts a talented bunch of students. </p>
<p>Rankings are useless–unless done by tightly outlined regions. I’m not sure how their ‘ranking’ data was collected but it doesn’t jive with my experiences in two major regions in the US. In my experience, the hiring focus is intensely regional, intensely. Students should try to factor in where they want to live when making a school choice. It’s not the be-all criteria–but it could provide a lift to a career.</p>
<p>Cheers, and all
We just had this same discussion last week…about firms hiring regionally. We came to the conclusion that it is primarily because of the student, not the firms. I moved across country after graduate school. The hiring firm knew little about my college or degree (from a “top” ranking architecture program at least by today’s lists). But that does not mean the firm was not interested. I actually think coming from a different part of the US gave me a slight edge, as I was the anonomly in the region. Unlike on CC, I think (but have no facts to base it on), that most students go to school locally, and remain local for whatever reason (money, family, etc.). It is also easier for firms to recruit regionally since distance and travel is not an issue. They may (or may not) know the quality of the area architecture schools. Basically, their applicant pool is primarily regional, not that they are only interested in regional applicants.</p>
<p>In short, I think if the student has the initiative to find internships and look beyond their college region, that the opportunities are still available. It just takes a little extra effort.</p>
<p>I agree k. I’m not sure firms set out to hire only the regional students–but the offices tend to be populated by regional degrees–probably by default and cronyism.</p>
<p>There is a general feeling that architects should move to one spot and build a career from that spot–but not everyone needs to follow that pattern.</p>