well, u gotta go through it to really understand what i mean.

ask any of the current architecture students here about the "design studio", and u'll realize it's not just a classroom where u do ur work. social skills is trained and embedded into the designers as a hard skill, landscape and interior included. but technicians, engineers, const.managers etc arent trained that way. it is a soft skill that they pick up along the line.

social skills to the architect/designers is as essential as drawing skills. it's not something u can do without. try and differentiate between soft skill and hard skill, u'll understand what i mean .

Alright, thanks a lot...

I think that this is the problem I would have to overcome...

Edited: Replaced "conquer" with "overcome". This is not command & conquer!

---

Added on March 7, 2008, 3:15 amI would just like to know...;

How does taking a *Diploma route >>> to a Degree route* compare to taking a *Foundation route >>> to a Degree route*?

[As you all may already know, I will be taking a Diploma in Architecture first, before proceeding on to the First Degree in Architecture.]

Thanks a lot in advance.

---

(After finishing Taylor's 3 years Diploma in Architecture, I am not sure for how many years will I have to study in their Part 1 Architecture Degree program [Which is a 3 years degree program by nature)...I do know that I would just have to study another year for my Part 1 if I choose the University of Melbourne for the Part 1 [Bachelor of Environments] Architecture Degree...I would get to study in the third year of the Part 1 Architecture degree in the University of Melbourne later on; with my Taylor's Diploma in Architectural Technology.)

---

Added on March 8, 2008, 12:55 amSorry...I have another question;

I wonder how come those three courses (below) from Taylor's University College;

1: Diploma in Architectural Technology

2: Diploma in Quantity Surveying

and the;

3: Diploma in Construction Management

...

I wonder why these 3 Diplomas from Taylor's University College all twin to the same "Bachelor of Environments (Third year)" in the University of Melbourne... (Wasn't that supposed to be the Part 1 of their Architecture program?)

I am confused...

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 8 2008, 12:57 AM

I jz got my STPM result...
I already bought the UNIK ID from BSN..
So i wonder which local UNI is better???
and how much is the chances of getting it???
Should i try those unpopular local UNI..??

I study science stream in stpm.. physics...

How is the interview..?? i didn't take Seni during my SPM...
but i have a good sense in imagine plus drawing... especially geometric stuff..

what would u want to compare? can u be more specific?



usually, u'll need only 1 year to finish the degree (which is part 1 equivalent, not LAM part 1) with their diploma. but i'm not sure if a degree from taylor's would warrant u to straight part 2 intake in melbourne. u wont be able to in IPTAs.

i believe their part 1 equivalent degree is called Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Architecture, not bachelor of environments. i'm not sure where u found the bachelor of environments, coz it isnt indicated in the website.

i will avoid to answer which school is better, but i will guide u in selecting the school of architecture that best suite ur needs. there are several aspects that u might wanna consider, commonly:

i. study duration
ii. prestige and accreditation
iii. cost, location and socio-environment
iv. opportunity and potentials of its graduates

and so on. so it depends on ur criterias. it would be best if u could express them, after u've read the first page of this thread, that is . so lets talk about this first before going into the details of the chances in getting in, the interview and what u gonna learn. some of these have already been discussed or addressed in the FAQ.

In terms of the Architecture Academic? Will I be having a more wholesome Architecture education by taking the Diploma route >>> to the Degree route, compared to taking the foundation route >>> to the Degree route?

I would really like to know the difference.

According to the Taylor's University College, yes, I would be able to go straight to the PART II in the University of Melbourne after my Part I in Taylors'.

Thanks for your answers BTW.

I was in reference to the University of Melbourne's Bachelor of Environments.

Why would the Quantity Surveyor and the Construction Manager students from the Taylor's University College be taking the Bachelor of Environments in the University of Melbourne as well? [Formally, I thought that the Bachelor of Environments was the Part 1 Degree for students taking the Taylor's Diploma in Architectural Technology; students who wish to get their Part 1 Degree from the University of Melbourne instead.]

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 12 2008, 12:13 AM

experience wise, u would accumulate more through the diploma>degree route. u will spend atleast 6 years (3+1+2) studying architecture, and not to mention the most probably 1-2 year working experience in between them. it's not a requirement, but most universities make it a special attachment to boost ur chances into degree.

but do note that more doesnt necessarily mean better. going straight to degree has its perks. u have only one break in between, and work experience is not a requirement.

this, i'm not very sure. they may actually have Bachelor of Environments in Architecture, but the name wasnt mentioned in full. for example, BSc in architecture's full title is "Bachelor of Science in Architecture". so melbourne's might be BEnv in Archtiecture, BEnv in Quantity Surveying, BEnv in whateverelse.

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 12 2008, 12:27 AM

Ahh, I see, thanks!

I was basically curious and excited to know whether will I actually be getting the chance to study some Q.S. (Quantity Surveying) subjects as well. He he...

What!!!??? Working experience???!!!

The rest certainly sounds great.

Thanks a lot.

Duration : I don mind study for how long...
prestige and accreditation : as long as the gov. and LAM acknowlegde
cost: i can find my why
location: anywhere
socio-env : whatever , i jz want to study
opportunity and potentials of its graduates : easily get job in local & overseas if can...

erm, i read through the 1st page b4...
BTW, do i need to send all my photocopies of cert, co-co and so-on, to the UNI i applied in the Online application form..?

in that case, ur choices are UTM, UM, USM, UIAM and UPM, in no particular order. these are the only local universities accredited with LAM part 1. if u wanna go abroad, the cost will be considerably higher, but after reaching part 2, u should hold equally recgonized qualification by LAM.




i'm not sure about the certificates. inquire with UPU, or maybe some topics here in LYN.

Thanks a lot...
I think i jz have to pray hard and read something on arch.

I've got my STPM results and my cgpa overall is 2.67 which is pretty low. Is it still possible for me to get a place in the local uni?

Thanks

Wait, that means you do something like 3 years in a public uni for the Part I and transfer abroad for Part II?

Burga - who is leaning heavily towards engineering at Purdue but will not make the final decision until all options are on his table and wants to see what his pretty decent STPM scores can get him.

Azarimy, regarding about the Diploma in Architecture, I am still pretty unsure;

Earlier you told me that taking a Diploma in Architecture to prepare myself for the Degree is indeed going to provide me with a more solid foundation in Architecture, compared to just taking the typical one year Degree Foundation program; because I would be having a total of six formal years of Architectural education overall when I take the Diploma route.

However, I just realized that I would also be having six formal years of Architectural education if I take the Foundation route.

Foundation (1 year) > Part 1 Degree program (3 years) > Part 2 Degree program (2 years). The total will also be 6 years like the Diploma route.

You see, the characteristics are like that;

If I take the Diploma route, I would be studying for 3 years in the Diploma program, which would then bring me on to the final year of the Part 1 degree later on; the total duration for my Part 1 would be 4 years. Finally, the Part 2 Degree will be taking another 2 years further on. (The total would be 6 years of Architectural education.)

If I take the Degree route instead, I would be studying for 1 year in the Foundation program, which would then bring me on to the 3 years Part 1 Degree program later on; the total duration for my Part 1 would also be 4 years. Finally, the Part 2 Degree will be taking another 2 years further on. (The total would also be 6 years of Architectural education.)

Look at that, both paths are having the same six years!

So once again, I would like to ask the question that have been bugging me;

What is the difference if I study the 3 years Diploma and take the final year of the Part 1 degree, compared to taking the 1 year Foundation for the 3 years (Part 1) degree? (2 versions of Part 1 that takes the same 4 years, which one is better?)

I am very curious on this.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 12 2008, 12:05 PM

For one, by taking the Foundation route, you spend one year less overseas, which you may want to consider if you are concerned about financial cost.

Hey, must Architecture students be hectic?
Sometimes, I wonder why they don't let us much time for some works. Erm, is it the same when we are working outside?
I soemtimes really don't agree with soem tutors, but I couldn't do anything as they don't even want to listen. I also found that some of them are very mean, and discouraging. They tend to give themselves excuses , saying that we should have beared with comments , as when you work outside, you will face the same. I can understand that. But don't you think they should not discourage so much, as it would be better to encourage people and make them more aware of their creativity ?

For example, I do have tutors they will say " i think you should stop now, I don't really want to listen to you" to their students . And this kind of tutors are not few. Sometimes, I really think they are mean. I just wonder why they want to be so discouraged, Aza, would you be like that?! hehe..I know it's still up to us if we choose to listen to them or not. But sometimes found that in school, we are learning, we should have more opportunies to learn through mistakes. We could have done wrongly as we are stiull new to a lot . if they don't even want to listen to us ,can they enlighten us by pointing our mistakes? and could we learn from our mistakes ? as we don't even have chance to finish our words or sentence.we do not know what happened and do not really what mistakes we have done.

I think some of them are favorism, once tehy have some kind of mindset, it's hard to convince, they will stop you anytime when you are trying to convince, it's even hard for those whose llanguage are not really good.

I just want to know if it is all the same in every schools of archi. I thought they should let us to enjoy and be interested or faith in what we are doing. I am not saying they should not give comments , but i think they should be more diplomatic. A simple manner... to let people finish their words .

Have a nice day-

BurgaFlippinMan, Taylor's Diploma students can also choose to study locally;

If I am not mistaken, students taking the Taylor's Diploma in Architectural Technology program can also choose to obtain their Part 1 (Bachelor [Hons] of Science in Architecture) from the Taylor's University College itself, or (The Bachelor of Environments) from the University of Melbourne. (They have two options.)

Education is so fun yeah?



This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Mar 12 2008, 05:00 PM

well, we have taken 2.50 in the past with an excellent portfolio. but to tell u the truth, there are alot of applicants with pointers around 2.70, so u really need to have an impressive portfolio to stand a chance of getting into an architecture course in an IPTA. however, if u mean ANY local university, then IPTS is still an option for u.

---

Added on March 12, 2008, 7:20 pmyes. it means exactly that.

---

Added on March 12, 2008, 7:28 pmthe argument here is about whether foundation is recognized as part of architecture education or not.

commonly in any universities local or abroad, foundation programme is just another pre-university programme. u're not engaged in anything substantial that would contribute to ur education in architecture. despite what the programme provider would say, foundation programmes did not attempt to do what the 1st year in architecture supposed to do - alignment, leveling the playing field etc (stuff that i've mentioned a few pages back).

so what do u learn in foundation? an introduction to all the basics. that's about it. they introduce to u: here's how u use a pencil. stop. here's how u use a computer. stop. there's no applied skills involved. architecture courses do not need foundation courses bcoz there's nothing to bridge between SPM/O-levels and the 1st year of architecture. u will learn totally new stuff from O-levels. heck, most architecture academics believe that u could start architecture after PMR, bcoz virtually nothing in SPM will contribute to ur education as an architect!

hence why foundations was never included in the total year of studying architecture. it is just a method of standardizing architecture education so that it complies with the other courses. sad, but true. we have been assimilated with the rest!

---

Added on March 12, 2008, 7:56 pmhave u watch any reality TV shows? especially those with judges that comments on participants? like american idol, strictly come dancing, x-factor, dragon's den/american inventor or stuff like that? i u havent, then u should. i particularly recommend dragon's den (BBC), bcoz it greatly resembles what architects face on a daily basis. find em. torrent them down if u have to. find dragon's den. this goes to all of u architecture students!

responding to the matters u've raised, there are generally two school of thoughts amongst the academics here. those who believe that rigorous training would make u buck up and be stronger - something ur tutors seem to subscribe to; and those who believe that nurturing is the best way to build a character. i am a combination of both, and i do incline on the rigor.

if u watch those reality TV shows, u often see people with absolutely no talent, and just armed with their beliefs that they are good enough. they came infront of the judges and sing. it was crap. everyone could see it. it takes somebody like simon cowell to bluntly give it to them that they are not good enough. he knows, coz he has seen thousands of others like them. this is similar in architecture: most tutors are experienced enough to know that certain designs just couldnt go anywhere. yes, the design maybe new to u, but it's not to the architecture as a whole. this is the big dilemma here.

students may pickup something relatively new to his knowledge, but absolutely obsolete in terms of architecture. tutors come by, and tell u that u're not going anywhere with that design. should u seek to improve and challenge his beliefs, or do u agree with him and venture into another path instead?

ofcourse, this could be approached in a diplomatic way. i believe so too. but there are times i just had to smack u in the face so that u would accept the fact that there are things u just DONT do. it's not bcoz nobody have thought about doing it, it's bcoz people have tried AND FAILED!

architecture students also need to be strong. in architecture, u dont learn theories that much as compared to other courses. in architecture, u'll learn architecture by simulating the real practice environment. the studio greatly resembles the office, as do the tutors=clients/bosses. if u expect things will be easier once u've graduated, u'd be wrong. graduation is just the beginning...



with all that said, u have to think about what is being said, and not how it is said. that's the best advice i could give u. the best practice is to record the conversation/crit/assessment/presentation, and transcribe it all in words. then u read it again, without any intonations. flat and straightforward. u'll realize that most comments are valid, but they are just not delivered in a most receivable way.

u can ask justin here of how i teach. i often let my students go out on a leash. like kites on a string. if u stray too far, i'll pull u down. if u're good, i'll let go more strings so that u can climb higher. i've made this approach so clear that alot of the tutors in UTM agreed to adopt it as a teaching method. i'm halfway towards my plan to dominate the world!

here's a book, written by my supervisor, that will assist u in getting through the crits.

The Crit: An Architectural Students' Handbook by Charles Doidge, Rosie Parnell and Rachel Sara (2004).

i believe most architecture school would have this book in their libraries.

---

Added on March 12, 2008, 7:57 pmARCHITECTURE education is fun.

u dont get this kind of flexibility in most other courses .

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 12 2008, 07:57 PM

today spm result just out, my question is how much are the requirement to enter architectural course in IPTA now? any spm leavers know? is it still based on merit?

btw thanks azarimy for very useful FAQ.

do more architecture studies in this month .
i am 2.92 , my friend is 2.7x . and most of us are 2.9-3.2 range .
just put utm as ur first choice , or else they wont call u up for interview .

my friend got 3.5 , i got 2.9 . i appeal to come utm , my friend no need appeal also got the interview . in the end i got the course and my friend didnt get anything at all although he went to usm and utm for interview . u really need to do well in ur interview .

if u're looking for a degree, then u still have another step to go -> pre-university. it means STPM, matrics, foundation, a-levels etc. but if u do plan to join an IPTA, then u're limited to STPM and matrics only.

intake requirements in architecture is always based on merit. there're no more race based quotas. for example in UTM we would rather not fill the empty spaces with below average students, and let the seat be empty to be filled by diploma students or polytechnics. the requirement itself is pretty low. u just need 2.00 in STPM to apply. but to get in, u need atleast 3.00 to stand a good chance. anything below that, u must hold a good portfolio and pray for a smooth interview.



with SPM u could also go through the less popular path: diploma or polytechnic (diploma or certificate).