I don't think "the standards set by university academia" can be defined as one homogeneous category. For example, Yale and Columbia are both "traditional" M.Arch. programs at Ivy League universities with stellar reputations, but seem very different from each other in terms of their approach.
i am not so much talking about their approach to architecture per se, but more about their approach to teaching methods. i beleive that it is safe to assume that yale and columbia both teach architecture in a manner very similar to that of the university of _________.
They are not. They cannot do what they do and be accredited... that's why I would put them in the non-traditional definition I think you seek. There are no classes, no grades and no given "program" to design your building around.
any accredited architecture program is going to be fairly "traditional," i.e. they gotta teach their structures and et and all that fun stuff along with studio. i'm not sure why you think sci-arc is so out there.
the one exception to the accredited rule is taliesin. that place is crazy. i have no idea how they got accredited. it's a bunch of frank lloyd wright munis hanging out in the desert, practicing "organic" architecture. i think it would be a cool experience, but you'd have to be very strong-willed not to become a zealot.
they lose their accreditation from time to time. but at taliesin, they do have classes for structures and things like that, and they also get on the job training at taliesin's architectural office. i believe they take a normal studio course like everyone else. it is a communal lifestyle, living in a tent in the desert. different, but it's a legitimate education, with a lot of hands on construction work. wendell burnette went there. also, the students aren't doing frank lloyd wright architecture outside of the office. it's pretty comparable to what you'd see anywhere else. the main reason not to go there is you'd be missing out on the university experience, and the housing development a hundred yards away means you'll be living in a tent in someone's backyard, which kind of ruins the romance of the whole think. if flw were still alive, he'd of moved it a long ass time ago.
that is somewhat the type of programs i am wanting to churn up. that sounds really cool except for living in someones backyard in a tent....smores and ghost stories, lol
it is a shame that hardly any of these programs have their accredidation. seems like this option is only going to be good for a post-professional program.
... as in <sarcasm>SCI-Arc is experimental?</sarcasm>
Explain how Texas Tech is different from SCI-Arc? It is simply the lack of a university setting? I ask as a UCLA grad working down the block from SCI-Arc. I am yet to find "experimentation" beyond that found at a university.
i really don't know that much about sci-arc....everything i have read makes them seem fairly innovative, minimalicious is probably right that it is just a marketing ploy.
1) Cranbrook Academy of Art is accredited. it is accredited as an institution of higher learning. it's architecture program is not accredited as part of the educational process of registration through NCARB. there is a big difference.
2) th AA (Architectural Association) is accredited as part of the ARB and RIBA process of becoming a registered architect in the UK, but you would have to say that its teaching and pedagogical structure do not follow regular processes.
3) Cooper Union has just started a Graduate course in Architecture. not sure its status.
4) Berlage Institute has a very different structure to most schools of architecture. it is not accredited for USA registration, but is so for European or Dutch registration.
5) Stadelschule - Frankfurt - another school that operates within an accredited government structure but which operates in a way that is quite distinct to the more "traditional" graduate institutions.
If you are so dead-set on "non-traditional" without being able to define what that means to you, be careful that you're not just rebelling for rebellion's sake. What is it about "traditional" schools that bothers you so much? I think you're going to have a lot of difficulty finding a "non-traditional" school that can put you on the track to licensure (i.e. is accredited), if that's at all important.
non-traditional schools
is anyone aware of any other non-traditional schools such as sci-arc out there?
Define non-traditional. What sort of degree program?
taliesin's pretty non-traditional.
ITT Tech is non-traditional, as well.
m.arch, non-traditional in the sense that they do not conform to the standards set by university academia. "experimental" in their approach teaching.
what is the reputation of taliesin's program?
I don't think "the standards set by university academia" can be defined as one homogeneous category. For example, Yale and Columbia are both "traditional" M.Arch. programs at Ivy League universities with stellar reputations, but seem very different from each other in terms of their approach.
Cranbrook Academy of Art
i am not so much talking about their approach to architecture per se, but more about their approach to teaching methods. i beleive that it is safe to assume that yale and columbia both teach architecture in a manner very similar to that of the university of _________.
retro-wrightian, and non accredited experimentation.
I do not condone such phrases
The University of what? You'll need to be more specific about what you think the "traditional" methods are, and about what you're looking for.
is cranbrook accredited? i feel like i read somewhere that they were not.
They are not. They cannot do what they do and be accredited... that's why I would put them in the non-traditional definition I think you seek. There are no classes, no grades and no given "program" to design your building around.
i don't think i can be more specific than saying traditional university methods. think of the polar opposite of common university methods.
community college?
lol, i am at texas tech right now, which is extremely traditional in their teaching methods
any accredited architecture program is going to be fairly "traditional," i.e. they gotta teach their structures and et and all that fun stuff along with studio. i'm not sure why you think sci-arc is so out there.
the one exception to the accredited rule is taliesin. that place is crazy. i have no idea how they got accredited. it's a bunch of frank lloyd wright munis hanging out in the desert, practicing "organic" architecture. i think it would be a cool experience, but you'd have to be very strong-willed not to become a zealot.
do you not consider sci-arc an experimenta program?
maybe in the 70s.
experimental sorry, everything that i have read seems that they are very different from the "traditional" architecture school
they lose their accreditation from time to time. but at taliesin, they do have classes for structures and things like that, and they also get on the job training at taliesin's architectural office. i believe they take a normal studio course like everyone else. it is a communal lifestyle, living in a tent in the desert. different, but it's a legitimate education, with a lot of hands on construction work. wendell burnette went there. also, the students aren't doing frank lloyd wright architecture outside of the office. it's pretty comparable to what you'd see anywhere else. the main reason not to go there is you'd be missing out on the university experience, and the housing development a hundred yards away means you'll be living in a tent in someone's backyard, which kind of ruins the romance of the whole think. if flw were still alive, he'd of moved it a long ass time ago.
i think you are stuck with cranbrook, arcosanti, taliesin.
i know someone who did a summer here, but it is not a degree program:
http://www.ecosainstitute.org/
is always a summer option too
that is somewhat the type of programs i am wanting to churn up. that sounds really cool except for living in someones backyard in a tent....smores and ghost stories, lol
it is a shame that hardly any of these programs have their accredidation. seems like this option is only going to be good for a post-professional program.
SCI-Arc is experimental?
compared to texas tech....
no, i think it is just a marketing ploy
You could get an accredited degree, then pursue your experimentation.
Sorry, I forgot to insert the <sarcasm> tag.
experimentation in cad monkeying 101
... as in <sarcasm>SCI-Arc is experimental?</sarcasm>
Explain how Texas Tech is different from SCI-Arc? It is simply the lack of a university setting? I ask as a UCLA grad working down the block from SCI-Arc. I am yet to find "experimentation" beyond that found at a university.
looks like thats the choice, i only have 1.5 years left for my m.arch at ttu
Oh! Are you looking to transfer?
i really don't know that much about sci-arc....everything i have read makes them seem fairly innovative, minimalicious is probably right that it is just a marketing ploy.
cooper union is a little kooky also,...bit late for a transfer i'm afraid
not looking to transfer, but considering going elsewhere for grad....i will be finishing my undergrad in the summer
cooper union is just undergrad, correct?
that yestermorrow is new-agealicious with the fonts and logo...
no lie, they're pimpin' design/build
1) Cranbrook Academy of Art is accredited. it is accredited as an institution of higher learning. it's architecture program is not accredited as part of the educational process of registration through NCARB. there is a big difference.
2) th AA (Architectural Association) is accredited as part of the ARB and RIBA process of becoming a registered architect in the UK, but you would have to say that its teaching and pedagogical structure do not follow regular processes.
3) Cooper Union has just started a Graduate course in Architecture. not sure its status.
4) Berlage Institute has a very different structure to most schools of architecture. it is not accredited for USA registration, but is so for European or Dutch registration.
5) Stadelschule - Frankfurt - another school that operates within an accredited government structure but which operates in a way that is quite distinct to the more "traditional" graduate institutions.
that's damm[right]son
Bear in mind, the AA will send you to the AA.
Wait you said finishing m.arch in 1.5. You aren't in grad school?
I think ttu has this half price off grad degree scheme.
1 year (including summer) grad program after completing undergrad here at ttu. haven't heard any news about half price anything.
graduating with my bach. in summer
Oh, so a BS or BA? Or a BArch? Important question.
dlb....great list, is it difficult to go from being registered in Europe to being registered in the US?
BS, should have stated that....sorry
If you are so dead-set on "non-traditional" without being able to define what that means to you, be careful that you're not just rebelling for rebellion's sake. What is it about "traditional" schools that bothers you so much? I think you're going to have a lot of difficulty finding a "non-traditional" school that can put you on the track to licensure (i.e. is accredited), if that's at all important.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.