u know, this whole issue between the tutor and the student in architecture/design studio have been debated in the academic world since 1960s. most popular is the protocols of quist and petra by Schon, where petra, a pragmatic, enthusiastic female student, found herself climbing a very steep hill when trying to go against petra, the very experienced yet self centred tutor. this protocol have been used as a reference worldwide, and a lot have been written about it.

yes, the academics do acknowledge the fact that there are such people in abundance, but it is currently the norm. we cant have pleasing tutors dominating the school, bcoz it will create a whole bunch of lame students who only study and study, but not improving themselves. to put it simply, we accept the existence of hard tutors bcoz we acknowledge the need of their harsh methods to become the hammer for most students.

maybe u should come to the bartlett where i used to study. the hard tutors are literally 95% of the line-up. so imagine if 10-12 of them decides to come to YOUR presentation... hehehe.




anyways, i do agree with clayclws. if u start noticing these issues early on, u will have ample time to tune and improve urself against such elements. this is not something u can teach. i mean, how do u lecture students about "how to become a good cyclist?" - you cant. each student MUST learn to cycle themselves, and then improve their technique as they go along practicing. there's no other way around it.

that's why architecture is known to adopt very practical teaching method. think about it. how many lectures do u have compared to the studio? about 50%, isnt it? in UTM we have 60%. that's huge compared to other courses which are 80% lectures and tests.

---

Added on March 13, 2008, 7:07 pmbecause of overwhelmingly huge numbers of students applying for architecture in UTM, we have the luxury to only choose those who put UTM as the first choice for the interview. but this is not always so.

u see, last two intakes, there are lots of top achievers applying to UTM, and all of them put UTM as 1st choice. now, if u're a slightly less than spectacular and put 2nd or 3rd choice, there's a huge chance u wont even make it to the interview session.

what i'm trying to say is, it's not the system, but situation. if for example this year not many people put UTM as first choice, then we can go to 2nd, 3rd or even 8th choice, if we still couldnt find the best candidate. so it depends on those applying with u. few ways ontop of my head to help u boost ur chances:

i. convince them all to NOT apply for UTM.
ii. convince them to put UTM as 4th choice and above.
iii. kill them all off...

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 13 2008, 07:07 PM

what do u mean by "change"?

i. do u mean top-up? meaning finishing off 3 year diploma, and then do 1 year degree?

ii. or do u mean change ur current diploma into degree?

if the answer is ii, then several other question comes to mind. what is ur current status right now? what year are u in? what qualifications do u hold prior to ur diploma?

the studio could be referring to two things:

i. the studio facility (physical space); or
ii. the learning method (system of education)

lets not get in too deep, bcoz i could ramble long and hard about the studio, as it is quickly becoming my focus in my research.

the studio as a physical space is where students in design initiate, develop and produce designs. it has the characteristics of three common elements that we can find in schools: classroom + laboratory + workshop. it is a classroom bcoz it is where u learn, meet up with ur tutors and discuss matters that relates to virtually anything. it is a workshop bcoz it is where u experiment - exploring, finding, testing, solving etc. it is a workshop bcoz it is where u produce the end product through a process of rigor.

however, it could not be independently one of those either. it cannot be only a classroom bcoz learning is not tutor oriented, and most of the time students learn by themselves or amongst peers - something that does not happen in normal classrooms. it is not just a laboratory, bcoz it is also where students socialize, chat, lepak, do weird stuff, have unsafe unprotected liberal sex and so on. it is not just a workshop bcoz u dont just produce, u explore and develop a product that is merely an idea of the final design (as in the real building).

as a learning method, the studio is a self-centered education system, quite unlike the common classroom. designers are involved constantly in a dialogue - either amongst friends, tutors, experts or even to their own self, the drawings, designs etc. what goes on in the studio is a process commonly known as the design process. students engage the brief provided by the tutors from the beginning of the project, explore the brief, expand the ideas, seek the problems and issues, and solve them - and not necessarily in that order. it's a cycle of thoughts that will eventually dominate how the architect thinks.

this system is used in virtually everything in the life of the architect. hence why all architects has the ability to dissect or reverse engineer any designs given to them. it also deliberately increase ur IQ. if u dont believe me, u can take an IQ test right before u start architecture. by the end of ur studies, u'll gain a considerable increase definitely.



so what do the students do in the studio? everything. it's where u live. it's ur nest, ur incubator and ur launch platform. what is in the studio? everything. it can range between tables and chairs for each students, but more often is that students will bring their own furnitures etc to make it their home - sometimes even bed. u'll be spending atleast 70% of ur time awake in the studio throughout ur studies. so what does a studio look like? here are some examples in UTM:



the studio is both formal and informal space. it's very similar to working in ur own room, it's just u get to hangout with ur friends (or girlfriendS) at the same time.



and yes, it is also where u construct models, build sculptures, design and so on. do note that each cubicle is a space big enough for 4 students. the girl above apparently is dominating the entire cubicle for her.



and who says u can only study at the table? on the table also can, nobody's gonna stop u.



yes, it is where u sleep!



lepak, mabuk2, main gitar, engage in homo-erotic male-bondings etc...



and yes, it can be formal as well.



and finally, at the end of the day, it is also where u pin up ur handiworks to be scrutinized by the juries. this happens on a weekly basis, usually called a crit, tutorial, demo and so on. it is where put whatever u've done, and we'll talk whether u've achieved ur objectives or not, ur weaknesses and strength and what to do next.



this should give u an idea what the studio is, and how it is central to the life of the architect - from student till a master.

interactive: yes. u learn primarily by doing rather than reading, listening to lectures and memorizing. to put it simply, it is more about what u put out rather than what u put in. in school, u put more into ur brain than u let out. in architecture, it's input, output, output, output.

flexible and casual: yes. bcoz there's no one way to output. u can do whatever u want to achieve an end product. more importantly, u are not restricted to a specific way to learn or study.



in contrast to contemporary beliefs, architecture works in a very tight schedule, and punctuality are held at absolute high. it is normal that we fail a student bcoz they're late for a crit or assessment. and it is even more normal that we fail a student for an incomplete work. it is about professional ethics of the architect, not just a student. it is easier if u see architecture education as being apprentice to an architect. the tutor is both ur boss and ur client. if ur client wants a job done by friday morning, u work like hell to make sure ur work is complete by friday morning, and attend the meeting at the designated time. failure to do so may mean the client would walk away, and u will not get paid for the work u've done. and since the currency of education is grades, then u will not get ur grades for late attendance or incomplete works. simple as that .

architecture do have a more open timetable than most other courses. although u spend most of ur time in the studio, it doesnt mean u're required to do so all the time. usually each school will designate about 2 days a week specifically for studio events (class, lecture, crit, tutorial, talks, debates , field trip etc), and often takes the whole day. it doesnt mean u're gonna sit for a lecture the entire day. crazy ah?

it means everybody involved in the studio (tutors, students, external experts, seniors etc) are required to be present in the studio. usually tutors will follow the syllabus of what to do each week, but the syllabus are basically quite flexible. most of the time u will engage in talks about design, crits and casual debates either with ur tutor or ur peers. but u could also sit in the corner like a kera sumbang and do ur own work . but u are required to be present during studio hours.




technical studies could be held either in class/lecture or in the studio, or both. what u have listed are a list of subjects, including the studio. ofcourse, in this list u cant see the percentage given by each of those subjects. but the studio, combined, will take about half of the entire education, and the rest are all the subjects. how each subjects especially technical studies depend on each school and their curriculum.

so now u know .

but believe me, by the end of first year, u'll realize that the stuff u learn in architecture are hardly anything bizarre. culture and history are technically like sejarah, but u focus on architectural history and how culture affects it. structures are basically applied physics (moments, load, pressure, tensile strength bla bla bla). behavioural studies are basically something u can just read and observe, but properly structured. it's not hard at all. rationale and logic applies all the time, mind u

history and theory of architecture ties directly to the evolution of the world. for example, world war II paved way for modernism. what does modernist architecture look like?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernism

u see this quite a lot in malaysia especially 50s-70s. the parliament, masjid negara, hospital besar KL are all modernist architecture. where does it come from?

before WW2, the art&craft movement generally dominates architecture spawning off from renaissance and all the artsy fartsy european movements. these art movements are quite reluctant to embrace technology and mass production - they believe architecture, as the mother of all arts, should be made by hand - all of it! means u must lay bricks layer by layer, sculpt the columns bit by bit and all that. it takes too long to produce a building, but each are beautiful, no doubt.

then WW2 happened, and all hell broke loose in europe.

in the aftermath, people realize they dont have any expertise in construction, but they need buildings fast. so mass production began and modernism took over. it eventually catches on with mass printing and mass communication, allowing the entire world to embrace modernism.

the rest is history.




i'm a modernist, and it is not dead .

as i've said before, u can change courses, but it is dealt on a case-by-case basis. it means u will need to bring whatever u've achieved to the new school, and they will determine whether a transfer is possible. transfer here means u stop wherever u are and continue at a new school to pickup wherever u've left off. changing courses are not "transfers". u can only transfer from one school to another school within the same course and the same certificate. so careful when using that term .

to be honest, it is easier to change courses within the same faculty. for example, if ur target is architecture in UTM, it is best to look for other courses under the same faculty (faculty of built environment) like landscape architecture, QS, planning or building const. changing courses within the faculty is dealt by the dean, and does not require involvement from university administrations other than the registrar. changing courses of different faculties within the same uni involves atleast two deans, several head departments and a whole bunch of people. and changing from one university to the other involves a alot more people.

so u can imagine the difficulty of changing courses.

the best option is to finish what u're studying before changing. the most suitable way is to start with diploma, bcoz with a diploma ur option to change/switch courses is very, very easy. but i do see that u already have STPM, so it might not be an option. best case scenario, if u're holding an engineering degree, u will start ur architecture part 1 at 2nd year. that's the best promise i can give u. i wouldnt dare say u can start at anything higher than 2nd year. interior design, maybe. but not engineering.

no, UTM does not offer ID. it is in the plan to offer ID as well as graphic/multimedia design, but we're talking atleast 5-10 years time.

i guess the question about landscape have already been answered by ur previous post .



why do anyone would wanna go there? first of all, the competition is less fierce, meaning easier to get in. schools like UKM and UPM are working hard for their accreditation right now, so if u join in this year, u should be able to graduate with atleast a part 1 within 3 years. i'm 80% positive on this especially for UPM.

why would anyone gamble going to an unaccredited school? well, atleast u're still studying architecture rather than some other course that u might not like. it's easier to take the exam later than not at all, isnt it? .

it was a rhetorical question...

so yes, there are ways to seek accreditation individually.

for drawings, usually they require original works only, so u're gonna have to compile everything into a portable portfolio. u could also reproduce it into a smaller scale, but u are still required to have the originals available for verification. some of my friends reproduced everything in A3, and kept the originals in several folio bags.

for models, u can take photos.

for assignments and project reports, u are required to have the original available.

the only difference between the two degrees are the title and probably the focus of the curriculum. other than that, they should be equal to part 1.

do u mean LAM/PAM examination exemption? coz exemption examination doesnt quite make sense to me.

examination exemption is what LAM accredited courses award u. part 1, 2 and 3 are 3 levels of licenses in the architecture profession. normally, individuals who wants to be an architect must obtain all three licenses to practice in malaysia. and u can obtain these licenses through LAM examinations.

but, there are ways to skip the examinations for part 1 and 2. u can do this by going through 2 accredited degree courses. first for part 1 (3 years) and 2nd for part 2 (2 years). passing the degrees would mean u're exempted from taking the part 1 and 2 examinations.

ok, on the bolded part, that's what we call "sugar coating".

what the sentence means is that after u finish BSc architecture, u will have to sit for LAM part 1 exam. it's not automatic accreditation. there's only two ways to gain accreditation of part 1: u finish ur degree in an accredited university, or take the exam individually.

what the sentence imply is probably a centralized application for the exam. meaning after ur batch finishes the degree, the school will organize LAM to come over the school at conduct examination all in one go rather than each students apply individually.

it was worded that way to gently tell the prospective students that they are not fully accredited, but didnt want to put the students off from studying there. if u look into other schools like UCSI, LUCT and twintech, u can find similar phrases .

i. yes, it will. architecture is not all about top achievers. we've rejected a couple of 3.70s before just bcoz their absolute inability to draw, and have very low self-confidence/unable to speak properly.

ii. huge differences that it is practically two different field altogether.

architecture is about design, merging arts and science together. u not only plan, but u take into consideration construction, technology, social welfare of the users, usability, practicality and everything in the building.

civil eng. is the science of construction. they dont do designs, they dont really care about the clients' needs, but concentrate primarily on making the building buildable through science of engineering. so the buildings are designed by the architects, while all the calculations are done by the engineers.




architecture and civil eng. cant live without each other. it's like the difference between a tailor and fashion designer. a fashion designer designs the attire, while a tailor builds it. another example would be a writer and a publisher. a writer writes the story into a book, while the publisher prints and publish them. so can one person be both? ofcourse.

no.

UTM's degree is 5 years, that awards u with both parts 1 and 2 with a single degree.

USM, UM, UiTM and other universities splits the course into two separate degree. 3 years for part 1 and 2 years for part 2, totaling to 5 years, exactly the same with UTM.

so it's neither better or worse. it caters for different needs or preference of the students. if u go to UTM, u dont have to worry about graduating and continuing for the 2nd degree, and u will become an architect after just a single degree. the disadvantage is that u dont have any breaks - it's full five years of studies. separate degrees offered by other universities allow u to take a breather after the first 3 years, maybe work for a year as an architect's assistant and gain more practical knowledge before joining part 2. the disadvantage is that it may take longer, and the intake for part 2 is usually more strict than part 1.

---

Added on March 18, 2008, 1:19 amno.

it simply means u will fail the interview for that particular application. meaning u can still apply again next year again and again. do note that if u apply to several other courses with interview filtering in a single application (u have 8 choices in UPU), u may be interviewed by up to each and every course u've applied (assuming ur score is nothing less than extraordinary). it is quite normal that u get called for 2-3 interviews from different schools, like some of our friends here have experienced.

so if u fail a particular interview, it doesnt mean u will fail the others or the subsequent interviews u will have in ur life . like i said, if u fail, try again.

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 18 2008, 01:19 AM

two things can happen:

i. u will need to take a short foundation course (maybe 1 semester) to finish off the extra subjects. or

ii. u will start 1st year of the degree, but u will have to take several subjects from foundation (meaning u will have extra load during 1st year).

---

Added on March 18, 2008, 1:30 amyes.

when u apply, UPU will send out ur application to all 8 choices. each will decide through the selection process, and will give the verdict back to UPU. from here UPU will observe who said yes and no, and only send u the highest choice that said yes.

the interview is part of the selection process, and each does not interfere with another school's interview. example: if u fail UTM interview (1st choice), u may still be offered UM (2nd choice).

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 18 2008, 01:30 AM

unfortunately, 3 years diploma will never enable u to sit for a LAM part 1 exam. u need a 3 year degree to gain equal qualifications to enable u to sit for the LAM part 1 exam. simply put, u need at least 3 years after STPM or 4 years after SPM for architecture education to be eligible to sit for part 1.

but if through which ever way u actually managed to sit and pass the LAM part 1 exam, yes, it is very possible for u to continue part 2 in any local universities.

if u've taken the exam but failed, take again. and take again until u pass, however long it takes, or until u quit .

---

Added on March 19, 2008, 1:24 amlike justin's said, it's very unlikely. and even if u wanna change, it's a helluva process.

ultimtely, it depends if the target course would wanna accept u or not .

---

Added on March 19, 2008, 1:42 amlooking at ur results, i cant say for sure whether u r competitive enough to secure a place in an IPTA, but it shouldnt stop u from applying. i just question why u put UKM and UPM's architecture as top choices as both of them are not accredited by LAM (lembaga akitek malaysia). u should sort out to atleast put UM, USM, UTM or UiTM (if applicable), bcoz those are the accredited schools.

headboy (ketua pelajar/pengawas?) should be a great boost to ur application, especially during interviews.

so yes, architecture might be for u, assuming u will upgrade/brush up ur art skills for ur portfolio, ofcourse .

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 19 2008, 01:42 AM

engineer doing architects job? sure, they sure would like to think they can.

there are hundreds of different things that could not be handled by an engineer simply bcoz they're not trained in it. one of it is the architect-client relationship. in construction, the architects are more similar to lawyers, protecting the needs and interests of the client from conniving thieves. this does not relate to design at all, which engineers are simply not qualified to do. if anything should happen to a project, dealings through an architect is protected by law, hence the client is legally safe. if the client did ever skip the architect and straight to the contractor for the example, it will expose them to all sorts of legal lawsuit.

it's not just what the architect can do, it's about what the profession offers legally. that's just one example.

in ur dad's company, it does seem that the IR are doing more than their job specifies, which is quite unprofessional of them. engineers only have right to suggest a change in the design, but it is still up to the architects' decision to do so. the architect has the ultimate final say as to agree or disagree with the engineer. if he is unsatisfied, he could just fire the engineer and get a different opinion, simple as that. remember that the engineer may suggest that the structure is unsound or very uneconomical, but in no way is the engineer qualified to say a design sucks. u dont wanna piss off an architect, bcoz architects talk - ALOT. if one architect bad mouths u, be sure the architects in the immediate vicinity will know about it . and this is well within the architect's professional code of conduct.

simply put, although there are certain areas that the architecture and engineering profession overlaps, there are more areas that they dont, and u cant assume that an architect can do engineers job or vice versa, unless they are qualified (by certification or professional accreditation) to do so. if u're interesting in becoming both, there are architecture-engineering degrees (double major) being offered in UK schools.

u're confusing urself between degree specializations and degree types. degree specialization is the title of the course, for example "architectural studies" or "architectural technology". degree types are the categorization of the degree based on the family of faculty that the school belongs to in the university's tree. architecture could be either arts or science, bcoz these are the two primary category in the world of knowledge. a university may put architecture into an arts faculty, while another puts them in a science faculty. some even have specialized into a built environment faculty.

there's no big difference in degree types, other than how they're managed by the university administration. what u should look for is the degree specialization if u seek to learn specific things in ur degree.

architectural technology obviously leans heavily on applied technologies in architecture, while architectural history is more on theory, philosophy and history.

---

Added on March 20, 2008, 6:23 pmi. accredited part 2 in malaysia is available at UTM, UM, USM and UiTM, while unaccredited part 2 is available at UPM, UKM and UIAM. do note that all part 1 courses are 3 years, and part 2 courses are 2 years. one exception is UTM, which combines both courses into one degree of 5 years that awards part 1 and 2 in one go.

ii. work experience is only necessary if u did not obtain good enough results to continue straight into degree. UM for example only allows those with exceptional results in part 1 to continue straight into part 2 without any industrial experience.

This post has been edited by azarimy: Mar 20 2008, 06:23 PM

no. u dont understand what i've said.

lets take an example: Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in Archtiectural Studies

Bachelor of Arts = degree type
Hons = degree achievement/distinction
Architectural Studies = degree specialization.



degree type does not indicate specialization. it is just how each university categorizes the degree system organized through each faculty. in this world, there are two primary fields: arts and science. hence why most courses u see out there starts either with BSc or BA. but there are other fields that doesnt really belong into these two fields like business, and there are others that are both like design. so how each university categorizes the degrees does not reflect on what u will learn.

my wife graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in Architectural Studies, but have a substantial amount amount science/engineering subjects that outweighs the art subjects. whatever category ur degree is in, it does not reflect specifically what u learn. as u can see, this is one of things that common rules doesnt apply in architecture .

now u're getting it.

diploma on the other hand does not have any certificate types. all diploma are diplomas. no diploma of science in architecture or whatever. so taylor's diploma "Diploma in Architectural Technology" should be read as:

"[certificate type] in [field of specialization]" = "[diploma] in [architectural technology]"

to tell u the truth, dont rely too much in the name. in malaysia, only part 2 degrees could use the title Bachelor of Architecture. any other degrees must use other names, hence why u have BSc in Architectural Studies, Architectural Science, Architectural Technology and so on. it may give u an idea of the emphasis that they have, but it's not necessarily must emphasis on that.

to really determine the school's emphasis, look into its subject list, and figure out the weightage of each subject. from there u can see roughly what the emphasis of the school really is.

yes, they can. part of the training in malaysia is urban design, where the student is trained to develop a large scale project, normally about the size of a small town (pekan). this is ofcourse conducted in groups. but the architect is not fully qualified to endorse road system alone. they must work with the planners. however, if they want, they could specialize in urban design and town planning with masters that would give proper qualifications to do just that.

road system is normally the work of the town/regional planner or road/transport/traffic engineer.

hello little fang,

landscape architecture is more of an environmental designer rather than what most people would think - a glorified gardener.

landscape architect is something between a designer and a botanist, where they have the essential design skills just like an architect, interior or graphic designers, but at the same time have substantial knowledge in botany and sociology with some basic construction knowledge.

and yes, u do get to learn all the scientific names of plants, its properties and characteristics, and how to apply them in ur design. if architects play around with materials such as concrete, steel, timber and what not, landscape architects play with plants and all that.

salary wise, landscape architects are paid about the same with interior designers - slightly less than an architect. workload is about the same, although landscape architects do learn an entirely different deal from what architects learn. so it's quite hard to say if the workload is REALLY the same or not.