Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No, I expect there to be elitism, but you saying that x y z unis are crap just because of elitism is only going to perpetuate the problem of elitism (maybe you don't see it as a problem, but I do).

    But none of you seem to actually know anything about LSA so what do you expect me to do? If you don't tell me your credentials I'm not going to just take the word of random people on the internet.

    If Archboi applied for DMU for part 1 that means he presumably looked around the university and at the work before bothering to apply so he must have at least thought it was okay, it's easy for him to say it was crap now he's at UCL.

    And secondly if he was looking at the various courses for part1, then I'm assuming he had no more knowledge/experience about architecture than I do currently, so was thus not really any better of a judge in theory than I am.

    Also, surely if practices are employing people from crap universities then finding there crap, they must be employing people from crap universities, therefore if you get a job from a crap university and don't be crap you'll be okay lol.


    Anyway this thread isn't really going anywhere now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "No, I expect there to be elitism, but you saying that x y z unis are crap just because of elitism is only going to perpetuate the problem of elitism (maybe you don't see it as a problem, but I do)"

    Example of how architecture is not elite: Westminster is a terrible university, but i'd say most people on here would put it within the top 10. Similar thing with Oxford Brookes. So if they can drag there way up the reputation ladder whats stopping DMU. SO CLEARLY THERES NO ELITISM HERE, JUST A SPECTRUM OF DEPARTMENT FROM EXCELLENT TO ****.

    "I'm not going to just take the word of random people on the internet."

    But thats exactly why you came here. For answers from random people on the internet. Shame they didn't have the answer you wanted.

    I'd also say, no matter how good you are theres a ceiling thats calibrated depending on your school because of teachers, quality of project set ect ect. If it really didn't matter where you went, and that you could go anywhere, this website wouldn't exist, there wouldn't be much reason (apart from the social side, town ect) to worry about where we would end up.

    I doubt any of the 70 % of jobs would be any good, not in terms of money, but integrity which is what a lot of people on here want.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    DMU is dire it's the kinda uni that gives new unis a bad name. My dad came in as an external examiner for surveying and reccommended they lose rics accreditation and knows some of the people involved in reviewing the architecture course who said it was a shambles from the organisation to the quality of the lecturers to the ability of the studens. Whilst A* aren't vitally important u need to at least show u can understand concepts , have drive and cope with pressure so u shouldn't be going to study arch with less than BBB really
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by waecskt)
    "I'm not going to just take the word of random people on the internet."

    But thats exactly why you came here. For answers from random people on the internet. Shame they didn't have the answer you wanted.
    Your other points seem fair enough and since I don't know any better can't argue or have any need to argue any differently.

    But I came here hoping the thread would attract the attention of people who had actually done the courses in question at said universities, or maybe somebody from an architecture practice who could say if they definitely wouldn't even consider a DMU student. Something along those lines. That's not to say I don't value your's and other's inputs, I do, but that is why I am being so disagreeable/argumentative. I don't, and people shouldn't, take anything at face value.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by waecskt)

    I doubt any of the 70 % of jobs would be any good, not in terms of money, but integrity which is what a lot of people on here want.
    The DMU websites says;

    Graduates readily find employment and many work for leading practices including: Foster and Partners, Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners Ltd, and Michael Hopkins and Partners.

    http://www.dmu.ac.uk/faculties/art_a...urses/arch.jsp

    and this:

    Leicester graduates are highly employable, and find work with top practices at all levels. The LSA boasts architects with national and international profiles among its alumni, including principals and senior partners in firms such as Avery Associates, Eva Jiricna Architects, make architects, and Weston Williamson. We are equally proud of our longstanding record of meeting the educational needs of architectural practices in the East Midlands, particularly in Leicestershire and Rutland. We nurture our close association with leading local practices, many of them run by our own graduates.

    http://www.dmu.ac.uk/faculties/art_a.../lsa/index.jsp
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    It's the job of the university to make it look good to perspective students. I haven't heard of any of those practises except Make which coincidently has had buildings nominated for BD worst uk building two years in a row. They are ambitious but crap. I've already explained that we judge the schools based on the work of the students we see, what students go where for part II. We all also work in practise at different points meeting students from different schools and judging them. No one has had anything good to say about DMU.

    Yes we are all random people but we've all trained in architecture and worked in architecture for years all over the country. You aren't going to get more informed opinions unless you ring up some good practises and ask what they think of DMU but the person that'll answer the phone will be some year out student that thinks the same as us.

    You applied to some of the poorest universities for architecture and got in to one, you aren't that great.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KeyserNI)
    It's the job of the university to make it look good to perspective students. I haven't heard of any of those practises except Make which coincidently has had buildings nominated for BD worst uk building two years in a row. They are ambitious but crap. I've already explained that we judge the schools based on the work of the students we see, what students go where for part II. We all also work in practise at different points meeting students from different schools and judging them. No one has had anything good to say about DMU.

    Yes we are all random people but we've all trained in architecture and worked in architecture for years all over the country. You aren't going to get more informed opinions unless you ring up some good practises and ask what they think of DMU but the person that'll answer the phone will be some year out student that thinks the same as us.

    You applied to some of the poorest universities for architecture and got in to one, you aren't that great.
    I never said I was great?

    So you've worked with people that went to DMU then?

    I've been on most of those website for the above practices a lot of the work looks pretty good, I'd certainly be happy in a job working for some of those designing that kind of stuff.

    End of the day I'm not trying to say DMU is as good as Bath or wherever I'm just trying to decide if it's better to go there this year than wait a year having done a foundation and go to a better university (if indeed a foundation would get me to a slightly better university). I'd rather have a mediocre career in architecture (if that's what a DMU degree gets me) than a career in anything else I'm realistically able to make a career out of.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    My point was that you clearly aren't a great judge of what is good architecturally.

    Very few people actually know what constitutes good architecture or what architecture is over the standard definition and it would be harsh to expect you to.

    I've only met one DMU student, the one I mentioned had quit. You should run a poll. Ask students at the top schools if they know any DMU students that are now at their school doing Part II. Maybe I'll eat my words.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KeyserNI)
    My point was that you clearly aren't a great judge of what is good architecturally.

    Very few people actually know what constitutes good architecture or what architecture is over the standard definition and it would be harsh to expect you to.

    I've only met one DMU student, the one I mentioned had quit. You should run a poll. Ask students at the top schools if they know any DMU students that are now at their school doing Part II. Maybe I'll eat my words.
    Maybe, I mean I'm not saying I know what good architecture is, but I know what I think looks good and what looks naff. I have a folder of saved images of architecture that I like from various architecture blogs such as arhitizer.

    Also surely if you'd met one of the DMU students who had quit that isn't a very good gauge is it? There are people who quit UCL who if asked would probably not talk to highly of UCL.

    Anyway I'm bored of arguing tbh, so I'm just going to ring up all the universities and ask them what they think of foundation courses instead.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMeters)
    Maybe, I mean I'm not saying I know what good architecture is, but I know what I think looks good and what looks naff. I have a folder of saved images of architecture that I like from various architecture blogs such as arhitizer.

    Also surely if you'd met one of the DMU students who had quit that isn't a very good gauge is it? There are people who quit UCL who if asked would probably not talk to highly of UCL.

    Anyway I'm bored of arguing tbh, so I'm just going to ring up all the universities and ask them what they think of foundation courses instead.
    Just for arguments sake how would you advise we judge the merits of schools if not by peer review?

    When you start to study architecture the first thing you'll realise is that it's about a lot more than what a structure looks like. Everyone thinks all you do is design a pretty building, it's basically the biggest misconception about architecture.

    I left the MAC and I thought it was great. I left because my enthusiasm for architecture had left me not because the school was poor, I think you'll find that with a lot of people. There is a guy on the forum that actually left UCL and he didn't have problem with the school only the subject. ArchiBoi applied for DMU, obviously had a look around and went somewhere else. He's finished his Part I, he has a lot of experience to look back and judge his experience of DMU when he considered it or the person I mentioned that was on the course and quit because he didn't like the school or the subject. If you aren't going to listen to experiences like that then who are you going to listen to?

    This thread is now 3 pages long, I don't know how many people have posted but how many of them have defended DMU or had good things to say about it? If it's your only choice then take it but don't make it something it's not.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I know it's not just about how a structure looks, but it's difficult to judge a building on other criteria when your just looking at pictures or models and drawings of buildings.

    I don't know, to me it makes more sense to judge individuals than the schools, because it is a creative and therefore subjective subject for a lot of it and everyone will produce different work. The only think which I think should really be comparable between the schools is the depth of theory that is taught, and then how well the students do in exams/assignments/application of said theory. But what do I know.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMeters)
    I know it's not just about how a structure looks, but it's difficult to judge a building on other criteria when your just looking at pictures or models and drawings of buildings.

    I don't know, to me it makes more sense to judge individuals than the schools, because it is a creative and therefore subjective subject for a lot of it and everyone will produce different work. The only think which I think should really be comparable between the schools is the depth of theory that is taught, and then how well the students do in exams/assignments/application of said theory. But what do I know.
    Believe me you are judged as an individual but the work you produce and the standard of that work is greatly influenced by the school you attend. The higher the standard of the school the better the work produced by the individual. Of course there are exceptions but you can't argue with the precedent.

    That's all I'm going to say.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMeters)
    I know it's not just about how a structure looks, but it's difficult to judge a building on other criteria when your just looking at pictures or models and drawings of buildings.

    I don't know, to me it makes more sense to judge individuals than the schools, because it is a creative and therefore subjective subject for a lot of it and everyone will produce different work. The only think which I think should really be comparable between the schools is the depth of theory that is taught, and then how well the students do in exams/assignments/application of said theory. But what do I know.
    embarrassingly little. even less than me. Which is hard thing to achieve. congrats.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    what are you doing/studying instead KeyslerNI?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I met a DMU architecture student once. She did not get the job at the practice I worked at since had the shortest interview I ever seen, lasting 20 minutes.

    I yet to met a working DMU student or architect in a working practice. I personally don't know where they end up to be honest!

    As for Westminster, yes they are probably one of the worse ranking university in general but their architecture department is excellent.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMeters)
    yup it is, but was just making the point its not about a levels, there is a lot of schools that say they accept foundations i dont have time to look really, but i just know from when i did that they do. Problem is a lot of schools/unis atm dont have the details of the 2012 entry requirements on there sites as yet. I know DMU certainly do, but that's a bit of a moot point since I can go there without one...


    Another separate point as well, I've heard people on here on the offers thread saying that Central St Martins is a really good unviersity, but I've always discounted their architecture course because it only needs 80 ucas points to get in, anyone know if it is any good?
    Well I'd expect most courses to have similar entry requirements for next year.

    Central St Martins is an excellent uni for fine art and fashion, their alumni for both are fantastic as well as some other courses. The reason why it is EE is because it doesn't care about A-levels, everything comes down to your portfolio and your interview, if you get far enough. So it doesn't matter if you get A*A*A* or EEE. However CSM's architecture course is not good based on what people have said and its accreditation problems and I haven't actually heard anything about the course itself.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yeahyeahyeahs)
    I yet to met a working DMU student or architect in a working practice. I personally don't know where they end up to be honest!
    Would you say you've met students from the vast majority of other universities then?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chenman27)
    Well I'd expect most courses to have similar entry requirements for next year.

    Central St Martins is an excellent uni for fine art and fashion, their alumni for both are fantastic as well as some other courses. The reason why it is EE is because it doesn't care about A-levels, everything comes down to your portfolio and your interview, if you get far enough. So it doesn't matter if you get A*A*A* or EEE. However CSM's architecture course is not good based on what people have said and its accreditation problems and I haven't actually heard anything about the course itself.
    So how would you compare CSM to DMU for the architecture course? I'm guessing you have no idea, but how would anyone else hazard a guess?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMeters)
    So how would you compare CSM to DMU for the architecture course? I'm guessing you have no idea, but how would anyone else hazard a guess?
    I have no idea on specifics but like CSM I have heard nothing about their architecture course and it also had accreditation problems. However if I was to chose I would go to CSM because I prefer London and it is a better university on the whole.

    I totally agree with KeyserNI though about architecture being largely a self regulating course. If you don't believe in them the best and most accessible source to seeing which courses are the best is the AJ table. It isn't perfect but it is generally accurate (of course they only list the top though). In the end you're the one who decides which is better from what you see and hear.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There seems to be a lot of surprisingly strong hate for DMU in this thread.

    According to their website, they have full accreditation with the RIBA and ARB.

    According to Unistats, 85% of graduates were working or studying within six months, and 70% of students in employment had a graduate level job.

    It's not Oxbridge, but is this not reasonable enough? To put this it into perspective, Manchester also has a 70% rate of graduate level jobs.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 24, 2011
The home of Results and Clearing

1,032

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year

University open days

  1. Sheffield Hallam University
    City Campus Undergraduate
    Tue, 21 Aug '18
  2. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Wed, 22 Aug '18
  3. University of Buckingham
    Postgraduate Open Evening Postgraduate
    Thu, 23 Aug '18
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.