Hello all, I am interested in a career change. I would like to become an architect. Currently I work in the automotive industry, I design and engineer interiors. I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering. My question is, how does one go about becoming an architect?
Edited 2/21/2004 11:22:17 AM ET by Zach
Replies
One spends 5 years in college earning a B. Arch (and yes, it'll take five years- there's usually 10 studio classes that you'll need to take = 10 semesters).
One then spends a minimum of 5 years working for sub-par pay to get the "experience" required to take the licensing exam. Many don't pass that test on the first shot, so it takes several more tries to get it right.
So, have you got ten years to spare? lol.
Bob
Check into a Master of Architecture degree. I recently went to the school af design at Louisiana State University to meet with an advisor about enrolling and because I have a drafting degree he suggested that I just go for the masters and skip the BS (no pun intended).
Thanks for the quick replies. Is there any place for someone who is more interested in floor plan design/layout and the engineering aspect? I know my weaknesses, the art/styling side is it.
Zach,
I'm a big book person, so as far as books go I like "Residential Building Design and Construction" by Willenbrock from Prentice Hall for the design of a building. It covers every part of residential design. For the drafting I like "Architectural Drafting and Design" by Madsen from Delmar. I think they are in a fifth edition.
You may also look at a your local university for residential design classes. I know at Louisiana State University they are listed under construction management, and at Southeastern Louisiana University they are under Design Drafting Technology. So, I guess it depends on your university.
Personally, I have been framing houses for 7+ years and that experience has been the best resource for designing houses.
Since you have an undergrad degree you are eligable to go to a Masters Program. Most programs are 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 yrs long. If you graduate, you must then work for a licensed arch for 3-5 years depending on the state. The norm is 3 yrs.
Many schools will recomend/ encourage you to take some intro courses (during the summer) before attending their program. Very good idea. It's amazing how many students enroll in an arch program at the graduate level and have never taken any arch courses. Since you are already familiar with interior design you may have an edge regarding asthetics, however there are design precidents established by our forefathers of arch that need to be given attention. Proportion, vocabulary and sequence are just a few of the issues they have addressed.
Two more things. For each school you apply to: a) Visit them during class time. Take in a lecture or two and attend a design studio class and b) attend a mid semester or final design critique. See how the profs treat the students. Is the criticism constructive or just pychobabble.
F
EDIT: What you are referring to is called "Floor Plan Fixation" This is not a strength. Archs do not design flat plans. They design SPACE. If you are looking for something that is more like traffic flows or circulation patterns, look into a school which has an Urban Planning Dept.
F
Edited 2/21/2004 12:05:25 PM ET by Frankie
If you go the Master's route, check with your state's licensing board to make sure they'll accept the particular degree for licensing. In NJ, you need a Bachelor's of Architecture or a Master's of Architecture (B.Arch or M.Arch). A Master's of Arts in Architecture (M.A.) doesn't qualify you to take the exam.
You may also want to look at AIBD- the American Institute of Building Designers. Some states will accept plans drawn by an AIBD, and the education requirements aren't so stringent. In NJ, you can't even use the word "Design" in your marketing materials (as in Design/Build), without having a licensed architect on staff. Trust me- I know- the remodeling company I worked for in the early 90's got a few "cease and desist" letters from the State Board of Architects for advertising design/build.
Bob
"I would like to become an architect. Currently I work in the automotive industry, I design and engineer interiors. I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering. My question is, how does one go about becoming an architect?"
Zach,
I looked into doing that (MS ARCH) a while ago myself. Currently I have a BBA from a relatively prestigious university, but work doing industrial prototyping. ....It pays pretty well, and I have tremendous job flexibility.
Anyway, Based on the curriculum and total time needed, it didn't seem worth it. Besides, at least out here (SE WI), archy's aren't used for much stuff.
But if you are young and full of ambition, have no geographic attachments, are bored with what you do, and can afford several years of low income, and more so of paying off school loans, go for it.
BTW, you don't have any dependants? Do you?
Sorry,
Jon
Do it only if you love it. My brother is going for his master's now. He needs that to be licensed in this state (or else wait something like 10 years). Even then he'll be working in an industry that seems to thrive on spec work and strip malls.
Are you looking at this as a way out of what you are doing now, is there a romantic ideal attached to architecture in your mind or do you have a passion for being creative in regards to homes and buildings?
There may be a career for you parralell to architecture that can make use of youyr present skills and provide you with satisfaction without the name brand recognition of archy letters after your name.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Being that you have your B.S. in Mech engineering, many or your engineering classes will count. I went and got my B.S. in Architecture. I would caution you aginst it. Jobs are very cyclical, and dont pay well.
I dont see how someone with an undergrad degree could get a M.Arch with out any background in architecture or engineering. You need basic design knowlege, HVAC, Structrual design,Construction meathods,Arch history, and theroy.
I did not get my M. Arch because I wanted a more diverse education. The M.Arch program at my alma-mater, left alot to be desired. Mostly the same as undergrad just re-aranged the classes. There was only on studio class, It was year long called Thesis. you will learn very quickly that you will never do a presentation in practice like you do in thesis.
I find it iroic that not to long ago in my state(Mi) you dident need the B.arch, or m. arch, to be licnsed. they changed it in 1984.One of my profs. said it was "politics". the universitys just want your money, so they say you "need" more education.
Funny thing is there are many architects that are "grandfathered" in with much less educational requirements. Even Frank Lloyd Wright would never be able to practice today. All your important classes are in undergrad. there are no structural, building systems, or HVAC classes in grad school. The thesis class is mostly self taught.
"I dont see how someone with an undergrad degree could get a M.Arch with out any background in architecture or engineering."
I don't either, but that's what the councelor at LSU advised me to do. My degree is in CADD.
"My degree is in CADD"
Kyle,
Just out of curiosity, what is CADD?
Jon
Well I could be a real smarta$$ and say that there is no training to become an archy, all you have to do is be able to draw unbuildable plans...But then there are a few good archy's especially the ones who post here and went to the school of the chicken...UK or something like that...
Maybe you should consider getting licensed in interior design. Not the foo-foo paint color crap, but the type that do interior layouts for commercial buildings. AISD is the group, I think. Or maybe ASID.
Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell'em "Certainly, I can!" Then get busy and find out how to do it. T. Roosevelt
The craftsman formerly known as elCid
Zach,
the current posts point to the questions of "where do you live?" and "what are your architctural aspirations?"
I live in Michigan, I will begin attending college in the fall at UM for architecture and I have done my homework pertaining to what is required for architectural licensure. Basically the amount of upcoming education is directly related to the college you plan to attend (only assuming that college is accredited). In the USA, BArch and MArch are the only degrees that will allow licensure but the fact that you currently have a degree will make a difference.
Answer the above questions and your information request will be fulfilled.
gk
Gabe, Do you know what the difference between a B.arch and a M.arch is?? They are both 5 years.
If i remember correctly you dident need any college education to become an architect untill 1978. Up untill then, it was just a long apprentisship then a long test. Now the apprentiship is shorter, as is the testing(slightly). the universitys got what they wanted, you to stay in school longer.
Gabe, glad you dident go to Lawrence, they have lots of "issues". The top students in my class hated the school, the admin even fired the dean my last year there. I hope they have improved, but doubt it. Many of the bad apples(teachers) are still around.
My senior year there, the school was being accredited by NAAB. They "accredit" all the schools of architecture in the country. They are a joke. To sum it up the process is "you pat my back, Ill pat yours". Any school can be accredited if they just get the checkbook out. It should have been a big "slap in the face" when the dean of Architecure was fired two months after the accredition team left. He was removed for things that they should have easly saw.
Led,
The difference between a BArch and a MArch is very unclear, even the NAAB admits that. Generally speaking, a BArch degree is attainable with 60 liberal arts credits, a BArch requires 90 liberal arts credits and a prior professional degree. The type of degree attained before attempting a MArch is reletive to the length of the program. If say you have a BFA you would need to complete 3 more years, if you have a BS in architecture you would need 2 more years. And if you have a BArch you would need only one more year. Soon the BArch degree will be voided and a more structured MArch will be the only path to licensure (except for the rare DArch at 120 credits that I failed to mention before). This is the basis of NAAB accredidated programs and all schools differ because of the NAAB's theory that allows schools some freedoms to teach in the direction of either the artistic forms or the technical forms of architecture. All info I have provided was learned by studying documents from NAAB, AIA, AIAS, and ACSA and is 100% true no matter what anyone tells you.
In reguards to your opinion about LTU, it is a technical school whereas UofM is an artistic school. Each has its own way. UofM however is better funded allowing a better staff of professors. Also in a survey sent to varied levels of arch. firms, UofM was ranked #8 and LTU didn't make the top 20.
In reguards to the pay of an architect. There is no ceiling reguarding architectural pay. An architect's pay is based on clout. Just the same as an artist. It is about selling yourself and conviencing a client that your work is worth top dollar. Any architect who is not happy with his pay is just not skilled at self promotion. That is the bottom line.
gk
In reguards to the pay of an architect. There is no ceiling reguarding architectural pay. An architect's pay is based on clout. Just the same as an artist. It is about selling yourself and conviencing a client that your work is worth top dollar.
True in part. A self employed architect has far more control over his income than a architectural employee. If job are few and far between, your client (aka boss) has no motivation to toss you anything except the smallest of bones.
Architecture suffers from too many practitioners and no quantifiable level of quality for the finished product. Clients are often unable to see the difference between the product of two architectural firms, except as it relates to the bottom line. In Dallas, pricing has been reduced to the third decimal place in some clients offices. Quality of the architectural product has become meaningless unless one is sued in many cases.
Regarding clout, all too many architects move around the country chasing the next boom, buying into a community during boom times only to sell later in bust times, only to repeat again elsewhere.
Any architect who is not happy with his pay is just not skilled at self promotion. That is the bottom line.
I gathered by another post you made that you are still in school. Having lived through multiple up and down cycles and having survived them all, I can assure you that watching a firm lay off as many as 300 employees in one DAY in a market comprised (at the time) of maybe 2000 practitioners is unnerving. The majority of the people in the field that have graduated since 1990 have not experienced a real downturn.
My bottom line ... There is a dearth of architectural practitioners really qualified to put buildings together. Almost any "artist" can draw a pretty picture, but few can get it built without compromising the design idea or allowing it to leak. Learn to put a building together and learn how to communicate this to a worker with little or no schooling without belittling him and the world will beat a path to your door.
Tony,
A highly skilled and extremely well paid architect once told me "perception is reality".
The longer I live, the more I find that he was absolutly correct. You don't become as famous as Frank Gehry without making your clients believe that the trash heap of metal they are buying was well worth the millions of dollars they paid for it. Or Pollack as a painter, or George Bush as a president...the list is long. It is a legal and ethical form of illusion.
An architect must first be a salesman. He sells his designs to clients to stay employed. He sells his personality to his boss to be promoted. He sells his building knowledge to the tradesmen to be respected.
For some silly reason, no school that I know of has marketing as part of their architectural program---they should.
For me, its natural. I get paid well because people like me and respect me. I am a good salesman.
gk
Cadd stands for either, Computer Aided Drafting and Design or Computer Assisted Design and Drafting.
It depends on who you ask and what college you attend.
They both mean the same.
You could always just work in an architect's office without going thru schooling. It limits you in that you cannot become a registered architect, and must work for someone else. You can do everything an archtitect would do, though.
Go to school and get training in AutoCAD. It will take about as much time as going to school to pick up the skills that you will need to advance, but you will eventually get there if you are good.
Be prepared for a drop in pay, though. CAD techs get only $28-$30,000 per year, and after about 5 years, you would get only about $38,000 a year if you are good.
It is fun, though.
"Cadd stands for either, Computer Aided Drafting and Design or Computer Assisted Design and Drafting."
Kyle,
I'm confused, you said you have a BS in ME, But you also said your degree is in CADD? So did you double major? What school did you go to? Nowadays I thought everything automotive was 3D modeled from the start. ie. no "drafting" at all?
Jon
"Zach" has a BS in ME (see message #1). I have a BS in CADD and I am working on a BS in CE while I also frame full time and design house plans on the side. I also am married, have two children (under three years), and can juggle while standing on my head in my sleep(It feels like that anyway) :-).
Kyle,
Sorry for the mix up. Sometimes it gets hard to keep track. Like Andy Clifford, I keep the computer on in the background as I'm working 'round the house, and from time to time, miss a detail like that.
"I am working on a BS in CE while I also frame full time and design house plans on the side."
What is CE? I'm guessing chemical engineering, if so...........don't know how yah' do it......with two kids.
CE is civil engineering. Chemical is ChemE.
Thanks for all of the replies, I will look into a March program. I am currently in MI and may be moving to the east coast, so I will be looking for employment out there (ME, NH or MA). I have always found buildings interesting. I enjoy the problem solving aspect of my current job, I assume architects come across many problems they have to resolve. Traffic flow patterns, heat efficiency and ergonomics are some of the topics I have been reading up on and interest me. Maybe I would be better suited for an architectural engineering position. I assume an architectural engineer is just as involved in the design and problem solving aspect. What do architectural engineers "really" do? Are jobs plentiful? It seems like something anyone with enough experience may be able to handle (like a good contractor) just by using "rules of thumb", is this so?
In my experience, Archys create as many problems as they solve. They take some engineering courses on the way because they are required but most aremore attuned to the art aspect of the trade and hire engineers to do the calcs for heat syusatems or structural loading. Soils testing and load bearing cpacity, wind loads on surfaces, heavy long cantilevers etc.
You could probably get into a large commercial office with little extra schooling.
Idealy, you could find a spot in an arch practice that needs your expertise in a city with an archy school and take classes part time while working in the field.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
You are right, archy's don't know everything. We do hire lots of consultants- structural, mechanical, electrical. If you knew everything you needed to know to do ALL of the engineering in a building, your head would blow up!!! We do put it all together though, and make the buildng 'sing', so we aren't a total waste, and I do think we solve many more problems than we create.
The problem with going to school part time is that very few schools are set up that way. The only one I know of is Drexel in Philadelphia.
It's the ones who do think they know every thing that cause the problems. The ones who know what they don't know know how to find the righ5t consultant who does know, ya know?
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Zach, I got a BS in Architectural Engineering. Now I am framing houses. Actually I do all carpentry tasks, specializing in finish work. I worked for a couple years as a CAD drafter at a design/build company. If they had thrown in some business classes the degree program would have been an ideal preparation for being a contractor.
At the college I went to an AE degree was a combined degree between the Civil Engineering department and the Art and Architectural History department. Other schools probably have a more integrated program.
As others have said, you can get a MArch degree, but the only effective way to complete the program is full time. By the time your life is consumed by studio, it will feel like full time anyway, so you might as well bite the bullet and jump in.
Nobody has mentioned it, but be sure that your degree is a professional degree if you choose to go back and as others have said is NAAB accredited. There are only a handful of states still allowing people to sit for the exam without a professional degree and the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) will not give you a license without a professional degree unless you meet very specific and lofty requirements.
I got my BSArch in 75 and worked in construction for 7 years before entering the field, became registered in 86 and started my own firm in 98, focusing on histroric preservation. I am now considering reopeing my construction firm because my work is too hands on for the majority of the CM firms I encounter here in Texas. I have worked full time in the construction fields since I was 14 and can assure you that most architects know less about construction than the average carpenter with 4~5 years of experience.
Nowdays, my days are filled with building codes, accessibility codes, etc. and I can't remember the last time I used butter paper to solve a problem.
Not to burst you bubble, because I wouldn't change a thing (except perhaps a client or two) about my career at this point of my life, but architecture is a noble profession that also happens to be one of (if not the) lowest paid professions there is.
Butter paper- now there's a term I haven't heard in a while.....lol. Most of the kids graduating from achitecture school probably wouldn't know what to do with a roll of onionskin if you stuck it right under their noses with all the computer drafting and rendering now.
Bob
I can echo tonys thoughts, Most of the teachers in Arch school will have worked in the profession many years ago. The sad part of it was when i was in arch school, I had 3 years a framing experience. I new more than many of the profs. they have been out of the profession so long. There are also some profs that have never worked in a firm, just "warm body with a M.Arch". You will learn more on-the-job, than you will in arch school. In MI, you can legeally design up to 3500sqft without a licenes. You might want to intern in a firm first to see if you like it. You may change your mind after sitting at a computer screen for 8hrs a day.
I know there are guys on this board that know more about consstruction than many of the profs that have the M.arch.
I gotta say that the majority of the profs that I encountered in school were and continue to be lost in academics. Very few had any real life experiences to base their preconceptions on.
We had one professor that believed in brow beating students until they broke down during jury, and many of the women in his classes were reduced to tears. This was/is (as he is still there) in grad school. I didn’t take studio from him, because I would likely have cleaned his clock right there in jury, either verbally or physically.
I have no respect for the majority of the architectural professor I have met. Most are tenured GTAs.
>>Not to burst you bubble, because I wouldn't change a thing (except perhaps a client or two) about my career at this point of my life, but architecture is a noble profession that also happens to be one of (if not the) lowest paid professions there is.
While this may be true for architectural employees in general, and true for many of the small firm practitioners that haven't figured out how to escape the hourly billing trap, I am always disheartened to hear this kind of myth promulgated. I don't know if you really believe this, but I can assure you that it doesn't have to be true.
Personally, I have found a sole practitioner/non-celebrity/residential-only practice can be VERY rewarding. I'm not sure what you would consider to be "highly-paid", but six-figure incomes are VERY achievable. I would suggest you try to find a copy of Alan Weiss's book, "How to Maximize Fees in Professional Service Firms", Best $7 you'll ever spend. (at Amazon.com)
the problem with trying to make six-figures is cash flow. Doing design work is very profitable, but there is only so much demand. Most homes are not designed using an architect. if you could have a monopoly in your town, and could keep busy, that would be idea. In our city we have 4 archys, and I dont think any of them are getting rich. manly because theres not the demand.
Hmmm, well, I just opened up the yellow pages for MY town, and stopped counting at 150 architect firms because I got bored, but there are probably well over 200. This is not counting building designers and drafting services either. You can make excuses or you can make money. Being an archy in the boonies just means you have to expand your territory, or be THE archy that everyone goes to, if you want to make more money.
Edited 2/22/2004 10:12:06 PM ET by Richard
For tyhat, I suspect that architectureal practices aremuch like building and contracting in that you have to build your niche.
In architecture forums, I see no end of copmplaints that decent fees are unatainable because of too many clients who think they are qualified to design because they bought a thirty dolar cad program.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Richard: You make a good point. Most of my work has multiple years of gestation before they become real and I am beginning to supplement my work with houses and small commercial projects as a way to smooth out cash flow.
My problem to date has been a succession of bad situations that have spaced themselves out over the entire period that I have been self employed. A few I was the cause of but most I wasn't. I will not go into the specifics, but suffice it to say, do not ever slit your wrists and climb into a pool of Pirana.
Historic Preservation is very hands on, if done properly, and I am finding that all decisions on a project I am currently wrapping up now have come back to roost on my doorstep because the project superintendent is incompetent. Learning from this, I am trying to build a better situation for myself in the future by becoming more proactive in my overall approach to historic preservation. Acting as the General Contractor is the logical step towards this goal.
I have found that, with over 38 years of combined experience in construction and architecture, I have forgot more than many of the general contractors in business today know. (BTW - I am not trying to slight anyone here, but I have learned that HP requires a different approach that conventional construction) I have also cultivated a cadre of very proficient artisans that are more than willing to follow me, because they make money on my projects.
Also, kudos on the book. I am not sure if I have seen it or not. I need to check my library. If not I will get it.
Edited 2/22/2004 10:07:20 PM ET by Tony
There's been a lot of bashing of architects and schools here. First, let me say I'm neither an architect or contractor. But, like any profession some are better at it than others. There are certainly contractors and subs you would never hire (or hire again). And, there are certainly great architecture programs as well as mediocre ones just like there are great law schools and so-so ones.
The material architecture students study is different from the skills contractors pick up through experience or, for the minority that take professional training, through construction programs. They are different occupations with different areas of knowledge. I do agree that most architectural training is too light on the fundamentals of how a building is constructed, and that all architecture students with no prior construction experience would benefit from a summer actually doing construction. But, most contractors are quite bad at design or distinguishing good design from bad design. The group of people who frequent this forum are at the better end of the profession, but you have to admit that contractors as a whole occupation, not the top 10% ones, are worse at design than licensed architects with similar years of experience are in construction knowledge.
I just bought a high-end new construction tract home by a builder with a good reputation. But, I could name two dozen design errors in the house, some as fundamental as there are no windows at all on the south side of the house, or there are no linen closets in the house, or you can't turn the front lights on and off without going out into the garage.
Builders come away feeling quite satisfied at having accomplished something because they built a house. Rightly so for all the work and coordination it takes. But part of some builders' bliss is their ignorance that their design is so poor.
It's important for each profession to appreciate what the skilled folks in the "other" professions bring to a project. And how awesome a project can be when a team with a good architect, contractor, subs, landscape designer, artisans, suppliers, and clients all bring their expertise together collaboratively.
Wayne,
I do not fully agree with your opinion. The fact is that an architect should have more building knowledge than a carpenter. Key word is "should" as they usually don't. It is both discouraging and infuriating that some people believe that a piece of paper makes them smart. The truth is only dedication can lead to wisdom. As an architect, I must make a pact with myself to be dedicated to learning. Currently I work in the field and attend school. It is part of my profession that when asked questions by the client or the builder that I answer quickly and correctly. If I cannot then I become a common draftsman.
A builder may build but a good architect has already built it once in his mind. As for the client's "skills" being colaborative in the process...is being generally indecisve really a skill?
gk
I appreciate your comments.
I did not intend to say that architects shouldn't know much about building. I was hoping to temper the maligning comments against "all architects" by showing that builders often are not that great at architectural skills, and both need each other to achieve excellence. When both are competent, of course.
The idea that a piece of paper makes someone smart is common to most professions entered mostly through education. Most young graduates eventually learn there's a lot more they don't know than they do know. The ones that don't rarely end their careers in the same field where they started. They often quit the field or end up in management. Yes, I agree how frustrating it is to work with such people.
I've had few indecisive customers, but that's because I work in industry instead of with the general public. But, indecisive clients certainly take the fun out of work. Is indecisiveness a skill? I can't decide . . . .
Hi Zach,
Since you already have your Bach. degree. Youcan get into a MArch program. Berkeley has one. It's a 3 yr professional degree for those who do not have a BArch degree. I would HIGHLY recommend this route. The BArch is important for young students but not necessary for someone who has a previous degree.
Good luck.
ljg