Which program is better?

Hello,

So I’ve applied for the INTO foundation program for QUB, however I want to apply to more foundation courses because I don’t feel it’s the most suitable. I’ve found the University Foundation Program, and unlike the INTO course I’m applying to, it has a broader progression to many universities, however it is not automatic based on a grade I have to achieve, I will have to apply through UCAS and do that whole process again. INTO is automatic progression if I achieve AAA.

Basically either a safer route to QUB, or a riskier route to Manchester, Sheffield, UCL, Nottingham.

What are their acceptance rates for foundation students?

If anyone has experience with foundation programs what do you think?

Thanks

If you want to study at Manchester, Sheffield or ucl then you’ll be better off applying through ucas to them for their integrated foundation year courses instead of attending one of the rip off free standing foundation courses.

Or better yet you would be better off taking A level exams.

Most of them are limited with the Architecture courses they provide, and don’t really have integrated foundation years, also applying through UCAS generally means the course starts at September, and most foundation years whether free standing or international foundation programs in the university have January and March intakes.

I wish I could do A level exams, but I’ve studied Australian and IB curriculum and adjusting to A levels would take a huge chunk of time which I could have completed the whole foundation course in, it’s a huge loop

Is this an International Foundation program?

If you’ve studied an IB curriculum then you don’t need an international foundation year.

Why do you think you need a foundation instead of just applying straight to architecture degrees?

Oh I should’ve clarified, it’s IB content, at an IB school, but my diploma is not IB. They gave us the choice of GC or IB, (GC being a diploma our school made up). Our teachers kept stressing that “it’s the same it’s the same” but it really isn’t, they meant the course itself which was the same, but internally assessed instead of IB externally assessed.

Basically: I have the national certificate not the IB diploma. It’s like a GED. That’s why I have to take foundation.

Are you sure that your universities don’t accept your HS diploma for entry?

Tbh for architecture I think you will struggle to find a suitable international foundation.

Yes. Even the content is recognized as insufficient enough to apply at undergraduate level. Tbh that’s the part that flames me up because I could have just gone to a government school (where everything is much easier) and get a 98% grade instead of staying at my school, study Australian mixed with IB curriculum content (much harder) only to get the same HS diploma and a more regulated grade.

What do you mean? Like a stand alone foundation program for architecture?

Yes. Architecture is a combination of creative studies and academics - finding a freestanding foundation that would be suitable for architecture (particularly for Bartlett) is going to be a challenge.

I recommend that you contact all of your preferred universities and explaining your current education situation/likely qualifications and ask if they would recommend a suitable course that they would accept for applying for architecture.

They might ask for an art & design foundation diploma rather than an academic foundation year (most international foundation years - especially those like INTO etc - are aimed at providing english language support as much as academic subjects).