more like master of disaster...

how would you be able to master both sumultaneously? would you drag it out over 4-5 years?

it is a 3-year program for both degrees

i know how long it says.

my question was more... existential?

my better half's sister is in a MLA program, i think it's 3 years, and even then, she's convinced she won't know diddly. i think a year hardly seems long enough, and will that extra year be at the expense of the other?

archinect member treekiller might be of assistance...

I'm not sure how much you'd benefit from having both professional degrees... It might be a bit overemphasis on the pieces of paper, since so much of education happens outside of school... Why not focus on one of the fields, work in the industry at an office that does both and learn some of the other by working with designers in the other discipline, and then if you are stil very interested, do the other? There are landscape designers who go to work at architecture firms, or architects who do landscape or urban design projects... It seems like alot of work for one person to do, to be both a registered architect and a registered landscape architect... If you want to start a practice that does both, maybe you can partner with someone from the other field?

I know of some architects who do some very nice landscape design work... One of my architecture profs studied fine art and then architecture, and now has an architecture practice, but also designs alot of great public art and landscape projects, some very beuatiful award winning cemetaries... I bellieve he won an American Society of Landscape Architects award for a cemetary, although he's actually an Architect by profession...

I met a guy in Boston who was a landscape architect working at one of the good firms there, and he said one of the principals was from an architecture background...

Also, depending on the school, landscape isn't all just greenery and plants... there is also alot of contemporary landscape architecture work that tends to blur the boundaries between architecture and landscape... See "landscape urbanism"...

i think treekiller did go that route, no, and is pursuing licencing for both fields...is that wrong?

i don't know if dual degree is necessary, though cant see it being bad in the end.

my partner is an architect who graduated with his masters degree under Adrian Geuze as thesis advisor. Geuze himself is from agriculture school i believe. anyway, we practice architecture with a definite opinion about landscape that is more sophisticated than normal for architects (or at least i think so). that is a result of my partner's input and the influence of geuze perhaps...at the moment we both think architecture and landscape are one field of design, not two, so we don't bother separating them as we work. we do our own scraping designwork right now because we are small. being trained as architects rather than as Landscape architects doesn't seem to be too much of an issue so far...

which is to say being an architect does not preclude working as landcraper at some point if you feel like it...

Mc Taco- it's a difficult route. one profession is hard enough, but to fulfill all the licensing requirements for both CLARB and NCARB is quite a drag. I wouldn't recommend this route for somebody with only a casual interest in landscape. But if you really, really want to straddle the fence, then go for it. AZ has a great architecture program, though I haven't crossed paths with any MLA grads from their.

Speed bumps I've encountered so far, LA firms don't know what to do with me and have been reluctant to hire me. Arch firms freak out and then underutilize my skilz after I'm hired. There is little to no pay bump for having dual degrees at first (I'm now three years out), don't know the long term impact yet. lack of specialized in depth knowledge of things like plants, advanced constructions details or taking studios with starchitects.

Advantages, I understand the site better then any architect/planner I've met. I understand building and construction better then most LAs. As an urban designer/planner, it rocks. as an architect wanting to work on large scale projects/infrastructure you can. As an LA integrating plants in the built environment/greenroof & wall, you can talk about the membrane selection and more.


an alternate is to get just the M.arch or M.LA. then work fin the other profession. I have several arch classmates that went that route, including working for peter walker on the WTC memorial. I also know that quite a few arch firms do hire LAs, Holl has been advertising a bit on this.

good luck!

So were you MArch/MLA treekiller?
Im currently doing a BDes in landscape, considering a MArch afterwards.
It sounds like so much of the knowledge of either field is based on specialised areas of expertise as gathered in the work place...

Do you see yourself as something of an intermediary treekiller, as perhaps it is it too much to be able to fully develop both professions?

mla/m.arch upenn '05

currently, I'm project managing a large mixed use project on a brownfield. Being an intermediary IS an apt description of my abilities and knowledge since I can communicate with the environmental & civil engineers better then anybody else in my office.

My career goals are less about becoming 'fully developed' in both professions, but do include registration as both an arch and 'scaper.

going from an undergrad in one to a grad degree in the other is a simpler path- but there are advantages to having dual masters as more and more folks enter the professions with grad degrees.

it's a lot easier for someone with an architecture degree to move into working in landscape architecture than to go the other way. I know a number of people who have architecture backgrounds but work in landscape architecture, and there are certainly architecture firms that do great landscape work.

it seems to me to be more a matter of attitude and educating yourself with the right mix of skills that suits your interests and what you want to do in your career. only part of that happens in the classroom.

like holz.box, I am marveling at the idea of taking just one extra year to learn landscape architecture. it doesn't seem like enough time to do much more than scratch the surface. it's not necessarily a bad thing to get some brief exposure, but make sure your expectations are in line with what you'll really be getting during that year.

there is some problem, as treekiller observes, with how the market views a dual degree. many people in the profession pay lip service to the idea of interdisciplinary thinking, but it is still surprising to see how people freak out when they can't think what box to put you in. there is a certain danger of being seen as a kind of dilettante. (and this can really be compounded when your resume doesn't show consistent long-term service to a firm or firms, yet. so it seems like the early years of the career for the dual degreed would be especially challenging.)

my gut feeling is that being a *true* interdisciplinarian is something that really proves itself out over time. when you're fresh out of school you might look like you just can't decide what you want to do. when you've got some solid experience under your belt in one field and then seek to take on projects that cross disciplinary boundaries, that's a different story. But overall, I think our profession(s) are better equipped to work in interdisciplinary teams than to employ people that embody multiple disciplines within themselves.

I think architects that are attracted to landscape are fabulous people! but it might just mean that you're going to be an architect that works really well and collaboratively with landscape architects. god knows we always need more of those.

i worked for an architect with a dual MArch/MLA. Her projects are all architectural but frequently have important landscape considerations. It seems to me that her MLA (or at least her interest in landscape design issues) makes her much more perceptive and adept at relating the project to its site. She also works closely with a lot of landscape architects. They seem to appreciate working with her as she is able to speak their language and the collaboration becomes richer as a result.