To get licensed as a landscape architect you need a degree from a CLARB accredited program. There are only 5 in California according to ASLA (and they ought to know). Unless it is one of the following degrees, it will not be if use toward licensure in landscape architecture - not that they are not good programs, just that they are not acceptable prerequisites for licensure.

California Polytechnic State University
BLA Program
College of Architecture and Environmental Design
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407

California State Polytechnic University
BSLA Program
MLA Program
College of Environmental Design
California State Polytechnic University
3801 West Temple Avenue
Pomona, CA 91768

University of California, Berkeley
MLA Program
College of Environmental Design
University of California at Berkeley
202 Wurster Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-2000

University of California, Davis
BSLA Program
Department of Environmental Design
College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
University of California at Davis
One Shields Ave, 142 Walker Hall
Davis, CA 95616-8585

University of Southern California
MLA Program
Graduate Studies in Landscape Architecture
School of Architecture Robert Y. Time Research Center, Room 339
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0291

Pasted from ASLA webpage

Here is a link that might be useful: ASLA list of accredited schools

Hi, nice to hear from you.
Thanks for the info.

What I'm primarily interested to know is which of these two programs is better. The one at UCB or UCLA.

Thanks for the reply.
Hope someone can help!

Laag actually has answered your question, or at least the one you alluded to with your eventual desire to work as an urban planner/landscape architect. As he has stated, neither extension program serves as time towards the license exam, as the programs are not accredited.

As to your question regarding which program is better, why not take a further look at the courses required for each, and determine whether the extra year and units of UCLA's program fits with what you want to experience? I am assuming you can see the course requirements on-line, or make a call to get more info.

I've known people who did the extension program at UC Berkeley, and I myself started the degree program at UC Davis but transferred to Cal Poly San Luis Obispo's program where I got my degree in landscape architecture, over 30 years ago now. My experience with the extension program that friends attended is that it was not as good a foot in the door for professional work as graduating from an accredited program, but people who graduated from the extension program were and are able to get hired, they just have to sell themselves better, because the extension programs are not as extensive,(they are obviously shorter in duration, and do not have the same amount of design studio time that the accredited programs do).

As an aside, it is perfectly possible to work in a landscape arcthitecture firm without being licensed, but you will not personally be able to stamp drawings with your own seal. I haven't found the lack of being licensed any impediment to what I do professionally...

Unless you work in a state with a very strong "practice act" (California not being one of them - not sure any truly are), I would second Bahia's assessment that not having a stamp is not an impediment. However, until you have built other strong credentials (impressive portfolio of built work, well known and networked, etc,...) it is a standard that you have been measured up to, so it has some value. Also, some people and/or organizations will write in "landscape architect" as required for their project (often not knowing what that means - often accepting others when ability is demonstrated).

I've recently completed the program at UC Berkeley Extension. Contrary to the info in the other posts, both UCLA Ext and Berkeley Ext are accredited programs, and count towards licensure in California.

In terms of which program is better, I have heard very good things about the UCLA program, and it has much more support in terms of the staffing and budget for the program. Hence, the program may be considered 'better' because of this and other factors. I can't speak personally as to the quality of the program at UCLA Ext, however.

My opinion would be that the UCB Ext program (or UCLA Ext) would be a good program to get your foot in the door at a firm, and as a step towards licensure, but what you do after that will likely bring you to your desired area of practice.

Here is a link that might be useful: Accredited Extension programs - CA LATC site

Hi,

Thank you all so much. I really appreciate the feedback.

These additional posts have really helped me out.

I'm very serious about the Extension programs, because, for one, I can't be bothered to prepare for the GRE. I know that's a lame excuse. But, also, I was told that the Masters programs tend to be more theoretical while the Extension programs are moe technical.

I think for me, it all boils down to whether I want to be in San Fran or L.A.

So can anyone out there give feedback on which of these two cities has better opportunities for LA's??

Thanks again!

Both parts of California have 1000's of landscape architects, landscape designers, horticulturists, working full time, and the clients are out there. I don't think anyone could say that one area is necessarily better than the other, job wise.

Obviously southern California is more populated and continues to grow at a faster pace, but the real growth areas in California are the more inland areas and the central valley, which would tend to be where entry level employment opportunities are greatest. Much more competition in the more desireable and expensive living areas nearer the coasts, and more experienced people will be competing with you for the same jobs.