I am impressed by how quickly version III of this topic has grew since its inception just last month.


It is great that UTM's usual full 5 year degree program has now successfully been 'transmogrified' into a standard & renowned international 3 + 2-masters format. (UTM's Part 2 program will definitely be in my list of consideration for the future. )

Some of my best works in diploma are currently at progress (in Taylors), and my final semester is, at present, in full-swing; so as a result, I will (sadly) not be able to make it to the upcoming degree intake in May 2011, for UTM. (As much as I would like to fight the battle to stand the gap between the middle earth!)

I, however, maintain my respect for this mature & established institution for Architecture - UTM. (Quite a significant number of my lecturers from the Division of Architecture at Taylors are graduates from this renowned institution of Architecture, and I realized there is usually a certain level/kind of knowledge & maturity demonstrated by these lecturers in tutorials, lectures, & critic sessions which tend to be profound; and interestingly in a style that is either liked or disliked by students- but I happened to be the type that enjoys it all very much, seeing it all happening in front of me during crit. )

I have some questions out of my curiosity if you don't mind:

- How does the standard in UTM (at present), compares to its standard say in about 10 - 15 years ago (as in back in our lecturer's tertiary education time-line)?

- What was the primary focus/style/philosophy of the architecture school back then?

- Today, is UTM more focused onto design/theory/philosophy/concepts, or is it more focused into building or architectural - technology/construction/science/functional designing?

- If UTM switches over to BIM in the future (a new work-flow & process for students - correct me if I'm wrong), would creativity/uniqueness in/of students be severely 'diminished'; due to the nature & 'rigidness' of the BIM system?


Regards & now proceeding back to nocturnal-noon work shift in a cold - vast - empty studio boring plain space...

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Apr 26 2011, 06:06 AM

This is all very interesting. Thank you very much for your response.

While the school keeps both soft & hard-copies of my works, the original copies of my works remains with me no matter what. But just only recently, the trade model storage area at Taylors architecture block has been thoroughly cleared of all its contents & cleaned up. All of my works such as the previous presentation boards, final models, conceptual models, drawings sheets, etc. has been removed for good. But thankfully I am still having the soft-copies of all my drawings & panels, & the photos of my final models. However, my conceptual models (demonstrating really interesting concepts) are gone for good as I had not took photos of them... Anyway, this is not a problem; all is well. I will continue producing works that are always better & improved over the previous.


Alright, here are some questions out of my curiosity once again;

When you said that "UTM's diploma now specializes on building a strong technical base", what exactly is the main "technical" emphasis on? Is it also similar for the Part 1 & Part 2 degrees?

While "UTM used to be very strong technically", I'm curious to know what is the reason for toning-down/reducing the technical aspects today (why has it been toned down)?


Regards - it is good to take a break from work.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Apr 27 2011, 07:04 AM

Thank you very much Mr. Azarimy for your extensive reply, and all the best in interviewing.

Regards.

Admittedly, it is rather pompous for LUCT to have placed such a bold, deceiving, & extreme statement in their website, where it also suggest an intended aggressive/desperate marketing tactic/strategy. (It is more about the deceptive method/tactic that they are using to proclaim or to advertise that program which is the issue here.)

EDIT: I don't think Taylors or the other IPTS did such a thing.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Apr 28 2011, 09:15 PM

Just a question that came across my head right now;

If an IPTS would to be "accredited" in the near future, will you agree that Taylors' Part 1 equivalent program will be the very first one to succeed in satisfying the "standards" required by the accreditation? (BTW yeah, Taylors SABD is VERY confident in getting it by this coming July. )

Why do you think it WILL or it will not succeed in meeting the standards of the accreditation? (Other than the fact that the program is of course still relatively new.)

Looking forward to hear especially your opinion Dr. Azarimy.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: May 12 2011, 02:56 AM

I just managed to survive through my final crit today; for diploma, and it was incredibly awful to say the least...

I was among the first candidate to present my work, and it all went on quite smoothly at the beginning, but then everything started spiraling downhill afterwards as one of the crits started slamming my presentation-boards, design-concept, and design; really hard.

After the crit, I thought I was in deep trouble..., until I saw the very same crit doing the exact same thing to the rest, and even harder & worse; until one student cried.

Nevertheless, I have never undergone such a negative & awful crit session before.

Normally, I always feel very good, successful, & complete after my final crits (in previous sems), but this particular final one (today) really makes me think-more-than-twice about how good (or suitable for architecture) I really actually am. (It is digging-up the sour-truth.)

In fact, this whole final studio subject (for this final semester) was already hinting very hard at me (at a somewhat terrifying manner); that architecture might not be for me.

Having consistently scored a B grade for all of my previous studio subjects, this semester's studio "questioned my previous grades" & claimed to be completely different...; it seek to dig-out the complete truth in me, then thoroughly analyze it, then treat the matter individually, & then finally count it against me when applicable. (I would be expecting my grades for this semester's studio to be very different...)

In fact, it has been very clearly "hinted" in the last days that many will "definitely" fail, and be repeating this studio subject again next semester...

BTW, this is in Taylors.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: May 25 2011, 01:36 AM

This is not always true.

Last semester in studio, one of our best student presented his works to the crits in an "incredibly" confident manner, and his spoken English was also incredibly fluent throughout the presentation. In fact, he was so confident & fluent that it was as if that particular presentation was already his "second nature".

Well, all of us than expected a great response from the crits, and all of us were also beginning to feel very nervous that we are all just not as good as that guy, and that we all will definitely fare terribly compared to him.

But what happened next shocked us instead; everything went the complete opposite direction from the positive expectations we were all having. The crits instead gave this top guy one of the worse & hardest "shelling" we have ever seen. (I was literally shivering just watching it.)

The crits literally "devastated" the 'ego' of this top guy and effectively "destroyed" his confidence by 101%. (And it certainly made a very negative impact on this top guy's studio performance ever since till the very end.)

So as you can see, being thick-skinned or "full of confidence & ego" could end up landing you in some very serious trouble instead.

Regards.

---

Added on May 25, 2011, 11:01 pmWell, it seems like everybody is just trying to "change" you out there...

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: May 25 2011, 11:01 PM

Well, that top guy literally tried to hold on to his presentation by further justifying (yes, he is thick skinned), but the crit immediately "blasted him off" by saying: "PLEASE - STOP - AT - ONCE, because you have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING (!) to justify at all!! If you think this is an "English Literature" class, or about how good your English is, then you are in the WRONG course!!! (Then the crit continued telling the guy off & "assaulting" his work, while the whole class was "pin-drop" silent.)

Anyway;

I am also the type that "justifies" in general, and certainly so when it comes to my works. But back in my mind, there is always this "conscience" (that says) that I must also pay "respect" to the crits by listening, giving in, & agreeing after a certain-limit has been reached. (So usually you will never find me persisting on & on with my justifications when the crits still continue disagreeing with me - I just do NOT want it all to end up in a big argument/squabble with the crits.) In addition, it is also like: "I have already just presented the whole idea in such a concise/detailed manner; do I need to repeat myself all over again???" (Because very often, it always seems like they have NOT heard what I have presented, and commented on things that was already "justified" in my words & presentation - so do I need to repeat myself once again like a robot?) Usually I don't really bother repeating what I have already said (to avoid sounding like a broken-record.) - It is more like "I've already mentioned it all to you in such a 'perfect' manner, but now you are still disagreeing; so be it!

Tell me if I am wrong.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: May 26 2011, 06:40 AM

Yes, I am the type that prepares very extensive/in-dept "lecture like texts/presentations" for my works & crits; while all of the rest (of my classmates) they just prefer to speak naturally/spontaneously to the crits instead.

Everyone was bombarded really hard/mercilessly by the crits anyway.

Our program/course did not provide us with verbal communication subject(s) specific for our architectural subjects, however, we did have our respective (compulsory) standard English classes at the beginning; with presentation assignments, if that is considered the verbal communication training you are referring to? (Throughout the course, we also had loads of presentations to handle in most of the others subjects anyway, that often tend to emphasize on presentation skills as well...)

Regards.

---

Added on May 27, 2011, 1:52 pmAh, even "students" gets involved in crits.

Last semester, I was crit by a student...

This semester, I was also crit by a student (and his voice & criticisms was 20X more 'potent' than the old & experienced crit right beside him; who instead hardly made any negative comments about my works.)

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: May 27 2011, 01:54 PM

Well, the author is entitled to his/her opinion no matter what...

In this case, the author is certainly 'bias' towards the emotional/emotive response, conceptual, "process (trial & error/go with the flow) - based", expressive, subjective/playful approach, flamboyant, spontaneous, & (or) "perceptual" aspects in design/architecture; as "opposed" to any attempted objectivity, formal/serious approach, the technicalities, systematic procedure based, technology, predefined-settings, established tradition/theories/principles, "functional/objective" approach, and (or) any form of predefined/preconceived rules & orders in architecture (that one might already be having at the beginning - and ready to be executed into final productions immediately).

Even within the design studios here at Taylors, it has ever been a constant war/battle/conflict and also an increasingly tough effort to try to justify or to uphold one of this sides in architecture. However, "Most" of the students at Taylors are always very typically/characteristically found on one of this two sides, while only a very small handful of minorities (if there is even 0.1% of such at Taylors) are riding the other side/territory (hint: and this particular group do not create or fancy colorful looking presentation boards and or "pompous" / "pretentious" form making).

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 1 2011, 09:46 PM

I wonder if that matters... (I was just mentioning about 2 primary characteristics in architecture; which I've been basically observing all around me that's all. )

Regarding my choice of architecture schools;

I will choose the oversea universities (in western countries) for their 'profound' emphasis & incredibly "high priority" on "nurturing" absolute design creativity/expressiveness/responsiveness/process/exploration" into their students as such...

But;

I will select the local public universities (IPTAs) for the 'profound' emphasis & "priority" on the "architectural technicalities/construction/problem solving/workability/functionality/practicality/build-ability" aspects of a building.

Regards.

In my opinion, no matter what you do in choosing institutions for architectural studies, it would be wise to avoid pursuing this course in private institutions altogether, most notably those that are more expensive; because please trust me, it is really not worth it at all.

For example, I'm coming from Taylors (which boldly claims in having "World Class Facilities" & standards); but seriously, the facilities here will still not be able to match or be on-par with the architectural facilities in an IPTA.

There is really nothing here (at Taylors) in terms of facilities for the architectural side of things; others than the usual design studios which are always incredibly filthy/dirty, in terrible condition, and still reusing the old battered-up tables & chairs from 10 years ago since the inception of this course from the old Taylors campus; you would not want to work in such deplorable conditions, unless it is thoroughly cleaned-up & arranged. In addition, the cost of printing in the campus, both monochrome & color printing on just normal paper, are also sky-high compared to the shops out there. (It is expensive made even more expensive.) Other than these, there are nothing else/no other relevant facilities for the architecture students, other than the outdated computer lab which is also being shared by all of the other design related course in Taylors; 95% of the time it is being occupied. (you get the picture...)

So as you can see, there is really no distinct advantage at all in pursuing architecture at even a so called IPTS with self-proclaimed "world-class-facilities" & standards; other than being faced with bunch of negatives... (Think of your hard-earn money.)

In-terms of the architecture standards, yes, there are indeed the good lecturers around in Taylors SABD, and you will be very lucky to have them (part time lecturers); those are notably the ones with the Ar. title in front of their names. But really only a few others around (full time lecturers) without the Ar. title are good at all (and you will be facing them all the time)...

I have also witness good (Ar.) lecturers being kicked out/dismissed/demoted, while other "kindergarten school teachers" with questionable ethics & attitudes are being promoted ever higher & higher up in the hierarchy/as program directors without anything more than a degree... (Hint: Internal political moves?)

Only one or two lecturers in here has a Masters (the can of worms), and they are acting so amazingly arrogant and suggesting to be the best of all. But in an IPTA, all lecturers are having PHDs!

Regardless, in this coming July I will like LAM - PAM to take a really seriously close look at this particular institution in the manner it is conducting it's architecture program, and the kind of standard it is really actually having... (Because from what I have been observing in the degree level; the standard produced by the students is rather disturbing to say the least...) Bottom line is; I will not even consider furthering into their degree program unless I need not pay the exorbitantly high fees just to undergo it.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 9 2011, 12:36 AM

I would agree with all of that.

And regarding pay, I won't be surprise that it would be rather measly/low especially for the part-time lecturers...

The situation in here is very political anyway..., it goes by "influence" & "favoritism" in order to climb... (the need to be the "type" that they want; because if you are just not the type that they are looking for, then the tables will be turned against you to your natural disadvantage) - I have overheard conversations like this among some good lecturers while being involved in tasks, coupled also with my keen observations around. (I am wondering how some so-called "arrogant" & "dogmatic" lecturers could get promoted till so high, while some Ar. could almost get sacked & demoted...)

Anyway, as a student, I personally should have considered pursuing this course in other much more "humble" private institutions instead (for my case I had to go private because I never took the SPM/STPM, but an equivalent instead.) And I should not have chosen this "especially" big-time money-making, ultra-successful, arrogant, & boastful so-called renowned University - with handfuls of their ultra-prideful full-time lecturers bragging & proclaiming absolute supreme-superiority over all other institutions, such as the IPTAs. Just observe the attitudes of the ones with higher-position & power... Instead, the real truth is that these really arrogant lecturers often feel "insecure" & "threatened" when challenged, so they basically pushed/up their power to "abusive" levels/schemes perhaps to compensate or make themselves feel satisfied... (They do not know that by their poisonous/contaminating/sickening/jealous attitudes, students are suffering under them instead of the other way round...)

(Nonetheless, there are indeed some very good, humble, & knowledge-generous lecturers around, but those are always very few & far between; depending on sheer luck to be having them in a particular semester; students who get them really benefit, get motivated, & inspired instead of the complete opposite...)



BTW, it is a pity to these students - who know not - (churning in by the hundreds every semester into just this course alone over here); this is because they are & they will continually be-taken sheer-advantage of throughout their course over here... (This is a warning...) (So far, every students had to go through the course here before they realized it, but then it was always "typically" too late...)

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 9 2011, 01:51 PM

Note the bold portion above.

That is indeed a very serious issue over here for the students; all of them are claiming that they really just want to complete everything as quickly as possible and then "get the hell out of this place" ASAP. (Some of them even mentioned that all they want is just to PASS, so that they can quickly get the hell out of this place.)

Surprisingly, I am not one of them with this sort of thinking; I instead desire to enjoy my education over here. (I was even planning to continue into their Part 1 equivalent degree over here.)

At the beginning (when everyone was just beginning this course at Taylors SABD - which started back in the old campus), everyone was really happy, optimistic, and greatly looking forward to all of it, and the attitudes were really different & positive instead. However, as each semester gradually goes by, everyone was suddenly beginning to hate this place more & more for some unknown reasons to me (and they really cannot wait to get out in all urgency)...; today, none of them plan to pursue their degree (Part 1 equivalent) over here. (All of them would rather pursue it elsewhere anytime, and then it also seems to me now that I am joining the bandwagon...)

BTW, speaking about the term "vitriolic" over here...; it indeed reflects on "some" of the full time lecturers as well, and yes, they will relentlessly do it for the sake of doing it - I won't be surprise that there is even a quota for it. (It is a very 'money-minded'/greedy ecosystem.)

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 13 2011, 03:44 AM

It would be ideal not to be using a personal "writing style" when engaging in a disagreement inside a public forum like this.

To the subject;

How can the design of a student be successfully 'nurtured' when the design studio lecturer/tutor does not talk about possible ways to improve the design in question, but instead sought to attack the student's individual personality, preference, style, & design choices instead? (Ultimately trying to completely discourage the student's own personal/individual design style of preference, instead of trying to further 'assist' the student in the pursuit of his/her particular 'style' for improving the student's design.) And then a "bad grade" or "F" is being awarded to the student at the end of the day just "on the basis" of not being able to show up a "good design"; also regardless of all the incredibly hard-work, efforts, & money that was being put into the final-productions & presentation of it all as well. (Is this right?)

Another kind of sickening/arrogant attitude that is also found "in the very same set of them" follows in this manner; "If you are not able to show/demonstrate the kind of enthusiasm that we are generally looking for in our students, then please question yourself what are you doing here in this course?? In the end, I'm very sorry, you are very likely in the wrong course; and I have no time for you!! You are the type of student that I will always be failing no matter what; as long as I am in control." (All of this, instead of trying to encourage & by giving the student a brief lecture to try to enlighten the student's mind more about this course/profession/expectation/criteria.)

(Note that the good lecturers "who are humble & generous with knowledge" are very few and far between, while the bad ones will certainly make sure that you 'get it' nicely...) As a student in here, you are either lucky or very unlucky...

I will let the rest who are in the course in this institution to share their point of views & experience (if they would like to) on whether could they agree with the manner/way in which all of them were/are being treated in the program that have paid so much for? (Or rather, the lecturers in here have already been having so much of you guys in the past before, that they can now simply afford to be 'muted' or 'immune' in arrogance & ego to your needs today?)

Anyway, I am very glad that I am now finally free and I will never ever have to face 'them' ever again; I am finally out in the tranquil golden sunshine; completely saved & far away from 'their' dreadful cold presence & threats. (However, I sincerely pity the large handfuls of students who will have to face them again next semester...)

In the past, I have been positively upholding & painting a very good bright image of Taylors in the eyes of the "public"...

"But what I have successfully given; I am also having the complete liberty of taking it all back."

"I will, and with no regrets." (Yeah, I am already beginning to sound like one of them evil ones, after having faced them so much this semester...)

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 17 2011, 01:51 AM

Dear azarimy, I really appreciate your profound reply; it is beginning to paint a clearer picture in my mind (certainly enlightening me more).


BTW, I have missed out just a few details in my previous post;

The lecturers basically formed their own conclusions silently (in their minds) about the particular "student"; "that he/she really have no interest at all in this course"; thereby making him/her really hard to pass/make it; no matter what. (They were totally wrong; because the student really does indeed have plenty of interest in this course).

Secondly, (during the presentations); there was no sign, hint, or feedback that the student will be failing at all; everything just seems to be OK/Normal as usual...; but suddenly at the end, the student was downright "shocked" that he/she had obtained a "failed grade".

I mean come on; if I have been profoundly told off (by them) with the sense being knocked into my head and all regarding my work & the course itself; and they had explained to me the reason why I "would" have to fail, and that they would have to fail me for "these said reasons", plus being "transparent " about the grading "criteria" (which they are clearly not), and also by being opened/transparent about what they can really afford to give me (or not) based on my overall performance; then I will "willingly" accept my failure for not being able to satisfy/meet up with their predefined set of standard/criteria. (And not about - "I dislike you, I just don't like your personality; therefore it is good to failed you and you would always be failing as long as you are under me.") (Manipulating the standards to fit their desires based on emotions...)

All in all, the situation is just very volatile/unpredictable over here. If you can really please the lecturers (especially if you really attempt to), then your grades will be "Golden" (seriously). But if you are just not bothered about this sort of things, and you so happened to be under the one (this semester) who is completely against your type of person/thinking/personality/character, then it would be seriously tough luck in passing... (No matter how good you are.)

In short, I was unfortunately under the wrong clients/bosses this semester. (Who also so happened to be in-charged of my other core-subject too - "very-unfortunately"; which clearly & unsurprisingly suffered to the max too. But for my other subject; which I clearly did not do very well in - it got a pretty good grade, and obviously that subject was under a totally different lecturer.)

P.S., it is indeed very interesting to note that the lecturers which I was under "this semester" for Studio; they were supposed to be the "ultra" soft, lenient, and the "Alright" ones (according to the majority of students)... Wheres the ones whom I was under "last semester"; they were technically supposed to be the really harsh/hard/merciless/brutal (tell-you-off-in-the-face) ones in which students in history had greatly suffered & failed under countless of times (and these lecturers were traditionally reserved for the final Studio level in diploma & then now in Final Degree Level); but very surprisingly I had greatly excelled under them last semester and had also successfully obtained truly excellent grades. (It is also very interesting to note that this semester's bunch of lecturers for Studio; they do not get along very well with our last semester's group - as there were lots of arguments & disagreements at hand even in the studios itself.)

Additionally, last semester, we had the very good Ar. lecturers; but this semester, we had none (except cocky talk big & emo ones); who can either be very soft - lenient ---> or super hard & merciless (depending on who you are).

"The grades & standards are just being manipulated/messed around with; to fit their spur-of-the-moment desires & emotions." (There are certainly more cases to share; even one directly involving $$$$.)

Once again, you are either just lucky, or very unlucky over here.

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 17 2011, 08:35 PM

To be fair to Taylors SABD, the grade for "each" major projects of a student (including the assessment sheet itself) are being openly revealed; by being placed/pasted over the student's works/presentation boards after the presentation. (But this is only currently happening in the Degree Program today.) (While at the Diploma level, there have not been such a thing; everything was kept invisible from us; hence I am really wondering how had they been grading us then... )

Next, we also do have the "moderation process" that you are talking about, however, I would like to say that it is just "so-called" only... This is because the lecturers over here typically tend to be very "buddy-buddy" like among their very own 'cliche' or 'clan'; so in the end, all three of them can come into a one-united-cohort and then fail the particular student anyway; especially when the group consist of one who is in supreme complete authority & control, while the other two are always being completely neutral & agreeing; not having a voice of their own... (And finally, there is no such thing as having an outsider or an external practitioner/architect getting involved in the very "secretive" & "sensitive" in-house moderation process over here.) (All the three lecturers/tutors involved in the moderation were always the ones whom we had always been in contact with in the Studio subject - our very own lecturers... So it becomes very easy for them to show all the prejudice or favor they want...)

Some of the lecturers over here are indeed very selective/bias; they will generally "like" to fail only certain kinds/types of students...

But, they have not managed to fail me in any of the subjects in this program "ever". (Just in-case if any of you are wondering.) (However, my whole CGPA has indeed been severely affected because of this particular semester alone; where the total has now dropped to about 60%.)

(It was certainly very unfortunate to have had that "particular" lecturer in my other core-subject as well, where he certainly took the complete maximum opportunity & advantage to deliver even much-more of the "highly-desired" damage to my overall grades/GPA for this semester; he really seriously wanted to stop/halt my pursue of "Architecture"; he really wanted me to stay "out" of this profession altogether; he was really literally in total-desperation to fail me/to stop me; he is claiming that I am a "potential" "threat" to this profession; he is claiming in anguish that this profession would certainly do much better without a future architect like me... Just imagine having him as lecturer in both of my final core subjects in this final semester... )

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 18 2011, 12:16 AM

Young dude, my advice for you is that you would really have to start learning how to draw as well as start building up your creativity ASAP, and then quickly master those set of skills... You won't be learning all of it over here at Taylors... The classes are really huge over here in foundation & degree level and most of the time you would just be thrown out into the ocean to survive by your own capability, might, & will... You would be expected to discover & learn most of it by yourself and then apply all of those skills in style & perfection into your various exercises & projects; you don't make it you fail as simple as that. There are lecturers who are cold and won't be having time for you. Most of the time it is all centered on "you" to deliver, produce, keep on producing, and showing work instead of receiving & feeding on information from the lecturers. You will be lucky to have good lecturers who occasionally give "free" lectures or talks; but never put your bet on it. It is expensive, and all the "heat" is on you to produce & to keep on producing work & results in order to pass... You must be willing to "invest" on medias & materials, and not blink an eye when all of it goes to waste together with your effort after each weekly tutorial sessions with the ones who will always be making you miserable & disappointed.

Note that regardless of whether you are in an IPTA (public) or IPTS (private), both are basically the same and will "throw" you out into the jungle to survive; to get stuck in quicksands & be bitten by leaches, but ultimately to stay alive and get out successfully to learn with experience... The only biggest difference is that in an IPTS (private) you will "Pay" a hefty price tag "just" to have the opportunity to undergo it all... (Go figure...)

Finally, FNBE (the so-called foundation program) is marketing; I do not think that you will be learning much from it other than doing loads of "cheesy" or "childish" exercises & projects lead by really young tutors (some of them are probably still students), and the program is very expensive IMHO. (Then after that once you step into the actual degree program itself, suddenly everything becomes 20X harder and you realize that you can't cope, while those who came in from diploma level are performing much better than ever, than those from the foundation level...) In addition, all of the MQA subjects are also being cramped into that one year foundation program... Think how worth is that?

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 18 2011, 04:37 AM

Interesting photos you have captured there, (which conveys the general insides of the architecture studio environment you are having at your designated institution).

BTW, which subject & semester-level were the drawings for, and was it a requirement to perform the drafting works manually with technical pen/pencils?

It certainly won't be Taylors.

None of the lecturers in here (SABD) are professors with a PHD to begin with, and I'm not referring to the tiny handful with Ar. title; whom are certainly good without doubt (but are just part-timers).

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 27 2011, 04:15 AM

Comparing Taylors to LUCT; I would highly recommend LUCT without any reservations on my part.

Based on my research;

Firstly, all degree, diploma, & foundation programs in general at LUCT are really very reasonably priced (which is certainly a very surprising matter to me); and their programs also cost significantly much cheaper compared to the similar but overpriced programs at Taylors. (It certainly surprised the hell out of me when I checked & compared.) I should have pursued my architecture studies in LUCT instead of Taylors; I am now regretting every single cent of it. (But it is my problem, however, now that you have came to know about it; you can certainly save yourself from it.)

For example, the foundation in the Natural & the Build environment (or FNBE) at Taylors cost twice as much as the architecture foundation program at LUCT; Taylors' FNBE program cost about RM 20K for one year, wheres LUCT's arch. foundation program cost only just about RM 10K for one year as well. (This should give you the idea of how much more Taylors is really charging everybody who comes to it, and they are surging fast & very hugely popular I need to warn you; so the confidence in charging high fees will remain & it will soar even higher in the near future...)

Just take a look at the other programs & compare the pricing as well and you will suddenly notice how much more expensive Taylors is...; you will notice that for every similar programs in degree or diploma level at LUCT & Taylors; Taylors' programs would always cost significantly more by RM 10 - 20K at-least...

Finally, at LUCT, you will definitely be having more freedom in your courses; from what I could very well see, the lecturers at LUCT generally tend to treat you as adults/grown-ups, and give you more flexibility & options; in general they will have more confidence in you. (At Taylors, the lecturers tend to be very restrictive, controlling, & sometimes treat you like school kids.)


Nevertheless, it can all get rather too lenient/laid-back/generous in LUCT from what I have heard; where it is very hard for lecturers to fail any students (even those who really deserves to fail); and then it is always far too easy to obtain truly excellent grades..., and perhaps the criteria(s) of an assignment are also not as strictly enforced; but rather being more open ended & flexible, and lecturers also don't tend to care too much; as long as you do the works & deliver, submit the assignments & attend the presentation & exams; all would definitely be truly well with you. (Whether these sounds good to you or not is for you to decide.)

However, I took a look at the works produced by LUCT students and they are certainly truly amazing for what they intent to be...


The bottom line is; choose what you want, but the fact remains that Taylors is significantly more expensive than LUCT in literally every respect I could see... (It was just too bad that my parents thought LUCT was more expensive than Taylors; which was why Taylors is the one that was highly recommended in my list at that point of time.)

It has ever been a common misconception that LUCT is always more expensive. (Perhaps it is due to their taste, style, and their way of portraying themselves in public that make them be interpreted as more expensive...)

I was also personally lead to believe that LUCT is really darn expensive, and they are the MOST expensive of all... (Obviously they are not.)


"The greater evils are the ones that hides behind the seemingly normal & humble looking white-washed office walls of a typical squarish office building (where nothing looks wrong; it can't be expensive "says the interested people"); but once inside, it charges exorbitantly high premium fees equivalent to opulent-palatial-style luxury rates..." (But yet the people still do not know about it & apply; thinking it is the cheapest around... Yes, admittedly I was also one of the victims. )

Bear in mind, that back then, Taylors (P.J.) was still just a normal-humble looking office building specifically just being only the basic rental spaces on a few selected levels... (as they do not own the entire building); wheres LUCT at that point of time was already a huge and established campus of its own. (And at that point of time, the fees at Taylors was already more expensive; but people are telling me that LUCT is more expensive; and I believed because I never knew that the fees at Taylors is more expensive back then...)


Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jul 4 2011, 12:22 AM