Sunday, December 12, 2010

MArch vs. Post-Professional Degree

I was curious if you have encountered many B.Arch grads pursuing an M.arch after licensure? I graduated with a B.Arch a few years ago, have about three years of work under my belt and have started sitting for sections of the ARE, while life is pretty uncomplicated and I have the time. However, I would like to keep the option of teaching open (my understanding is the M.Archs are necessary if one wants to teach later on) and do still have a strong desire to go back to school in the next couple of years. I myself don't know anyone that has taken this track but I just wonder if it does happen occasionally and would like to hear your thoughts on the idea.

First, congrats on your obtaining your BArch and a desire to pursue additional education.

As you BArch is a first professional degree, you do not need to pursue the MArch, instead seek a post-professional degree. At some institutions, it may be called a Master of Architecture; at other institutions, it may be called either a Master of Science in Architecture or by another name.

NCARB maintains a list of post-professional degrees available as you may gain IDP credit by pursuing a post-professional degree.

While most accredited architecture programs will probably prefer candidates with a post-professional degree, you may be able to teach with only your BArch if you apply to some programs or seek a teaching position within a community college.

I would advise that you not pursue a post-professional degree ONLY to have the credentials for pursuing teaching; instead, determine what aspect of architecture you wish to pursue and seek a program that fits your interest.


Dr. Architecture

No comments: