As the IT profession continues to take a stronghold on the use of the title 'architect', and the architectural institutions fail to protect the use of the title outside architecture, how do we stand up and reclaim our right of exclusive use?
x-jla
May 14, 15 11:53 pm
in other news the AMA is asking DR.Dre to change his name to just Dre...
chigurh
May 14, 15 11:55 pm
call your local AIA chapter, ask those bunch of do-nothings to "protect the title"
awaiting_deletion
May 14, 15 11:55 pm
do some architecture!
let's start there.
Architects who go to architecture school will do architecture in school and when they get out will do architecture?
Dr. Pepper!
x-jla
May 15, 15 12:02 am
I just heard God refered to as "the architect" I called the Board to file a complaint...
Wilma Buttfit
May 15, 15 9:48 am
How about we let go of the hangup over that word and don't try to police it at all? Those with a license to practice can use Licensed Architect or Registered Architect to differentiate themselves, no harm done, I predict it would actually increase relations between architects and the public because it isn't seen as overly controlling and unreasonable all the while being more descriptive therefore more communicative and more realistic. Might work better than trying to grab exclusive the use of a word, which just doesn't work, clearly. It should be flattering to architects that others use the word architect, not offensive. Why do you need exclusive rights to a word anyway?
Miles Jaffe
May 15, 15 10:42 am
Donald Rumsfeld was the architect of the Iraq War. Insurance corporations were architects of oBOMBaCare. The Architect designed and built the Matrix.
If the AIA actually had any power (or balls) it would aggressively litigate over copyright infringement and fair trade violations. Then of course everyone would have to pay to use the registered trademark of the AIA: Architect™. Think revenue steam.
Carrera
May 15, 15 11:03 am
^ On to something there. Lots of precedent of using protected words in different contexts.
citizen
May 15, 15 11:23 am
As all these examples demonstrate, architect (like doctor) is both a title and a regular old noun. The OP states it already: there's the profession itself (somewhat regulated), and then there's that big wide world outside. Don't waste time on a crusade trying to keep software designers from using that (modified) title --until, that is, they use it to take a client or building project from you. Then, punch 'em in the face.
SneakyPete
May 15, 15 11:26 am
Make better use of your time designing buildings and learning about systems and materials. That way we can claim back the ROLE and RESPECT of 'architect' without giving a fuck about the TITLE of 'architect'.
curtkram
May 15, 15 11:51 am
in other news the AMA is asking DR.Dre to change his name to just Dre...
in related news, jimmy buffett is now a 'doctor,' as is kayne west.
x-jla
May 15, 15 11:58 am
^ the precious "public" will be so confused...
The public: "doctor jimmy buffet can you write me a perscription for vallium...my back hurts."
Jimmy: " no sorry...im not an actual 'doctor'...but I can recommend a margarita for that back pain"
curtkram
May 15, 15 12:13 pm
i don't understand why you're so hung up on this. if you want to be an architect, be an architect. you're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggonnit people like you.
kayne west is a doctor because he fits the limits of what a doctor is, because he received a doctorate from a university in chicago. presumably that university had the right to bestow that title. kayne west is not an architect, despite the fact he many think of himself as one. the reason he's not an architect is because he didn't do the things required to become an architect.
using the title 'doctor' is not limited to medical doctor any more than using the term 'doctor' is limited to saying you're doctor who. this is actually something almost everyone understands. i'm guessing you're slow to catch with everyone else because you really feel bad about not being an architect, and you think this is somehow related. it's not. kayne west calling himself an architect would be similar, kayne west calling himself a doctor is not.
i used kayne west as an example here because jimmy buffett didn't go to gsd and pretend to know something about what we do. also, i bet jimmy buffett is better than most medical doctors at suggesting remedies to fix what ails us.
so why are you trying to assume the title architect rather than something far more useful like "Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret"?
SneakyPete
May 15, 15 12:43 pm
I'm confused. Do you actually give a shit if the title has legal protection?
file
May 15, 15 12:44 pm
"If the AIA actually had any power (or balls) it would aggressively litigate over copyright infringement and fair trade violations."
The AIA is little more than a reflection of its members (and the huge number of non-member architects) who, taken collectively, rarely - if ever - agree on anything meaningful. Without reasonable consensus, the effective redress of grievances by a profession is virtually impossible. And, with only 44,000 +/- dues paying members, the AIA certainly doesn't have the financial resources needed to litigate this sort of issue.
If you really want conditions like this to change, then a prerequisite certainly would include a broad majority of the graduate architects in the country coalescing around a common set of goals and values. But, I don't expect to see that happen during my lifetime. Given these circumstances, throwing stones at the AIA is both childish and a waste of time.
SneakyPete
May 15, 15 1:00 pm
file, my dad used to have that strip hanging on his wall at the office.
Miles Jaffe
May 15, 15 1:33 pm
Screw the M Arch, get a D Arch and you can be Dr. So-and-so Architect.
curtkram
May 15, 15 1:53 pm
I'm confused. Do you actually give a shit if the title has legal protection?
for you it's just your sense of entitlement right? i don't give a shit about your sense of entitlement. it seems jla has some other motivation. he often brings up cooking or rennaisance/classical architects to try to compare current registration to something unrelated. existing title regulation exists as a way of advertising the professional services you can provide. if you can't stamp drawings, you can't do what architects do in the communities with these regulations. 'architect' and 'registered architect' isn't really a clear distinction between the service a person can provide. they sound alike because they use the same word. if ncarb announced "registered architect" is going to mean something different than "architect," architects are pretty much the only people that will hear it.
that's why title regulation exists. you can disagree with it all you want, nobody cares. i'm just trying to help bring the conversation back to the real intent and purpose of the regulation. if you really think 'architect' is a restricted title because of chefs or michelangelo or whatever, perhaps this perspective is something to consider so you can have a more sound opinion on why you dislike the current regulation.
x-jla
May 15, 15 3:17 pm
Curt, my motivation is simple, its to expand the discipline of architecture and stop the trend towards further detachment. I really have nothing to gain professionally as I do not design buildings for clients. I also support gay marriage, but I am not gay. I know this is hard for some people to get, but I care about the built world, and I feel that the profession is ill equipped in dealing with the demands of the 21st century as it has demonstrated thus far. My passion surrounding this issue is actually more about the overall state of the built and natural world. The hang up over title is partly symbolic of the overall lack of cooperation and community between design disciplines, that could otherwise be united in a common effort towards creating a healthier environment...Title protection is mainly about ego, and to drop that ego is the first necessary step towards cooperation and collaboration.
The chef analogy is completely relevant. I suspect that you keep bringing it up because you are troubled by it. Again, the title 'Chef" is not legally regulated, it is self regulated. Because of this, the title 'Chef' carries a connotation of quality, talent, and experience. Despite the lack of legal regulation, we don't see every tom, dick and harry calling themselves chefs do we? Its also probably more dangerous to prepare food than to prepare building plans that will be checked by others regardless, and go through approvals prior to being built....I believe 10k people die each year from food poisoning...how many die from poorly designed architecture? Anyway, the main point is that people seek chefs because they want above average food ...people seek architects because they want above average buildings...well at least they used to...If architects cannot provide above average buildings, and if the title is not one based on excellence but rather on beurocracy, then their role will be just that....reduced to nothing more than red-tape...
x-jla
May 15, 15 3:26 pm
Lastly, what is architecture? Please answer this question...without defining architecture this debate is pointless. To me, architecture is the deliberate manipulation of space. That's all. If you intentionally manipulate space for whatever purpose, or with whatever medium, then you are an architect. Architecture is not just walls+ceilings.
Wilma Buttfit
May 15, 15 4:10 pm
I am taking a microbiology class, first words out of the professor's mouth were "Hello, scientists!" Why do you suppose scientists haven't made that a protected title?
Good_Knight
May 15, 15 4:10 pm
It is interesting to observe that the most vocal against protecting the title "architect" have not done what it takes to become one. Or they are business people, lawyers, etc who have a vested interest in seeing to it that the architects who actually are architects don't circle their wagons.
Those who say, oh just keep designing better buildings, are total ignoramuses regarding the notion of working harder not smarter (leverage).
Back to your CAD saltmines and stop chiming in on that thing in which you are not qualified to speak (until you pass the examinations) beotches...
Volunteer
May 15, 15 4:53 pm
How can a term be legally protected if it was widely used in the public domain for many different activities before the attempt at protection was made?
SneakyPete
May 15, 15 5:04 pm
Wow, curt, you're a real dick. kram it up your ass.
SneakyPete
May 15, 15 5:05 pm
"Back to your CAD saltmines and stop chiming in on that thing in which you are not qualified to speak (until you pass the examinations) beotches..."
Only after you realize that without the unlicensed, the pathetic joke of an architecture business model wouldn't exist.
Menona
May 15, 15 5:52 pm
So in my experience... I did all the work (from pre-design to CDs), plotted out the drawings, got Mr. Clown's stamp from the little box, and inked the stamp & stamped the drawings.
Then, Mr. Clown, RA, AIA, came in and sat down, looked over my work, signed his name, and kept 4 out of every 5 dollars that were paid for the project.
So has this happened to anyone else who isn't an Architect? Probably not. This is probably a rare and unique situation that I encountered. It wouldn't be a standard practice for this in any real respectable profession. I'm sure it doesn't happen anywhere else.
Or does it?
I did hear of a brain surgeon who would come in to the operating theater at the end of an operation and sew in the last few sutures during close-up and charge the patient for work on the whole procedure from diagnosis to aneurysm-fixin' & followup.
The actual surgery itself was conducted by a guy who went through Medical School and had been doing surgeries for years, but he'd not gotten in enough hours of "Contract Negotiation" to get out of his residency and take his Doctor tests. So he's basically the Janitor. Or Janitor's assistant (he hadn't passed his janitor test either).
x-jla
May 15, 15 5:57 pm
Good point Pete...Maybe architecture employees should unionize and refuse to do the work of an architect until they are recognized as such.
This NCARB decision is exactly what I expected...nothing...They basically said that they will no longer use the title intern, which was never a mandated title anyways...so basically they will change IDP to DP...haha DP.
x-jla
May 15, 15 5:58 pm
+++Menona
x-jla
May 15, 15 6:14 pm
I know a woman who managed and designed projects all over the world...she never got locally licensed because she was basically working globally...working for a big firm...moving every year...A license would be pointless...She was referred to by peers as an architect, her title on the company website was architect, but she is not licensed...What is she then? Certainly not an intern, not a CAD monkey....
SneakyPete
May 15, 15 6:19 pm
She's an entitled, unqualified ignoramus. QED
awaiting_deletion
May 15, 15 6:33 pm
hi - i am a licensed architect. when i wasnt licensed i said not being allowed to call yourself an architect was stupid. i receieved letters from the state when i went to apply for exams because my website had versions of the word architecure on it. i have my licenses now (2 states) and i still think not allowing people who studied architecture or via some non traditional route practice some form of drawing and building design to call themselves Architects is STILL stupid.........like jla-x is stating it damages the potential business growth opportunities of architecture and alienates us further from society.........tintt said it at the top - architects and licensed architects. end of story.
Good_Knight
May 15, 15 8:25 pm
The recent position of NCARB to do away with the horrendously offensive, belittling title of "intern" is a step in the right direction. What actually does become the replacement of the title "intern" remains to be seen. How can they possibly pick anything worse? (wait. don't answer that -one must not hold their breath though, given NCARB's and the AIA's perilously derelict if not outright offensively passive disregard for the interests of intelligent young up and coming architects: they just might outdo themselves and no one paying attention will actually be surprised).
Their first step in the right direction in the last few years was to tear down the wall between graduation from an accredited school and the immediate availability to take the A.R.E. (tear down the ridiculous requirement to first complete the ambiguous path through, around, over, under etc the IDP program).
If one is smart enough they are smart enough. Get out of the way parasitic bureaucrats!
Moving forward, the NCARB needs to figure out how to implement an A.I.T. examination (a mini A.R.E. of the same difficulty in terms of challenging the old IQ) which would immediately follow graduation from an accredited school. And yes, after passing, A.I.T.'s would beArchitects In Training.
Then, during the experience (formerly referred to as IDP) and examinationSSSSSSS (stop referring to the exam as if its one simple examination) phases along the path towards licensure, the A.I.T. needs to be seriously mentored, trained, coached and provided with every opportunity to become a licensed architect after the requisite time and examinations are completed during a Residency in an architecture firm. Resident and Architect In Training.
The profession has hobbled itself for far too long by forcing the exceptional up and coming architect to putter along at the same level for years with the legions of drafters clogging up the design process.
If an individual is smart and disciplined professionally enough to get into and then graduate from an accredited school, take and pass all divisions of a rigorous IQ test (the ARE), and successfully complete the requisite years of experience, the profession needs to get the hell out of these people's way so the profession as a while can reap the benefits.
Then, step out of the way and let the inevitable, incessant whining of the unlicen-sable continue to provide them with the passive aggressive motivation necessary to get all the drafting done so their cohorts among the similarly intelligence-challenged within the lower levels of the food chain within society can continue on continuing on with their senseless, linear algorithyms aka zombie production which is necessary to perpetuate breathing, eating, sleeping etc made necessary by the overbearing influence of their medulla oblongatas, to the exclusion of a functionally significant prefrontal cortex. Whine on unlicensables...
curtkram
May 15, 15 8:31 pm
sorry for offending you sneaky. in the future i will endeavor to say less mean things in your direction. i had posts in my mind from you previously that i couldn't go back and find, so i think it was mix-up in my head. the vitriol pointed at you was wrong, and was my mistake.
Miles Jaffe
May 15, 15 8:43 pm
Do Architects In Training get special uniforms?
Good_Knight
May 15, 15 9:16 pm
Probably not needed Miles.
Seeing as Engineers in Training are taken very seriously by the marketplace and awarded commensurately for their intelligence and discipline in preparing for, taking and passing (not to mention the same attributes applied to their profession as a whole as reflected in the resources allocated and organized to set up the E.I.T.) their entrance exam, and they do not wear special uniforms: precedent points to uniforms being a rather hollow gesture.
The day the better paid and more roundly respected engineering professions take up a policy of uniforms will be the time to consider it for architecture as well.
Volunteer
May 15, 15 9:42 pm
How about "Naval Architects", are they allowed to use the term?
x-jla
May 16, 15 11:22 am
technically, foreign architects are no longer architects once they step on US soil. Ando, Ban, Zumthor....All Cad monkeys or interns
May 16, 15 2:24 pm
yes and no, jla-x. They are simply not qualified to practice architecture for projects within a state in the United States due to not being licensed in that particular state.
They can still practice architecture for a project in their country even if they happen to be on U.S. soil. It is about the location of the project or basis of facts such as if you are offering to do services for someone in the states for a project located in the state.
Volunteer,
That depends. In Oregon, naval architects are exempt under ORS 671.030 if I recall correctly. They are exempt because their work doesn't involve buildings and if it did, it usually is federal and that again would take them outside the purview of Oregon state laws when it pertains to federal enclaves with sole-federal jurisdiction or where only criminal state laws apply not civil laws that doesn't apply.
ken robeert
May 17, 15 6:45 am
Yes, NCARB punted, and yes the verbal gymnastics with regard to the press release was stunningly myopic. NCARB needed to have the task force, especially those ARE candidates, and newly licensed professionals speak their experience on the task force and how the decision was arrived. Yes, NCARB's changes affect their internal dialog, when dealing with a candidate, however, the griping about the AIA's role here completely here only demonstrates the ones naivete about the issue. The AIA is screwed up, I witnessed that first hand at the Saturday business meeting in Atlanta, but your barking up the wrong tree about responsibility for regulating the term architect; it's each individual state Board, and in my state, the legislature that's responsible, the AIA has zero to do with writing laws, they only have $260k in PAC money, hardly buys a cappuccino in Washington.
Good_Knight
May 17, 15 11:41 am
Because the states acquiesce most of their authority on all things governing the profession to NCARB, though, they definitely by default lead each state bull gently by the nose ring.
Eventually the NCARB's position will have a ripple effect.
Agreed: the AIA is majorly screwed up. They don't represent the interests (i.e. mostly business development) of most practicing architects. They are intent on focusing dues and activities on the interests of the bureaucrats who play Wizard of Oz behind the curtain.
Their latest Look Up campaign or whatever it is once again proves that they are entirely focused on impressing other architects instead of communicating the value of the profession to the average everyday joe who hires architects or who might hire architects (the campaign as is typical is like opening an Arch Record wherein its merely eye candy overload with precious little substance; so little in fact the average business person within the marketplace finds the effort to pay attention nauseating and vertigo-inducing. Its ridiculous. Once again the campaign is merely architects speaking to other architects who are collectively gripped by the self aggrandizing ego mania which in the end only says, "look how cool this advertisement is that we put together, doesn't it just tickle your iris to no end?"
Donna Sink
May 17, 15 12:02 pm
Good_Knight, you must not have been hanging around here for the last 18 months since the Emerging Professionals Summit at which the AIA, NCARB, ACSA, and NAAB formulated and immediately began implementing changes based on the deeply-held understanding by these organizations that education and practice of architecture, especially for young professionals, is changing drastically and the organizations all need to change as well to keep up.
The AIA's RePositioning started two years ago, and the organization is already restructuring.
NCARB's Future Title Task Force and Licensure Upon Graduation initiatives are in full force, with the report on the use of the word "intern" being the first step, and the proposals due in January from 32 (IIRC) schools that are considering curriculum changes to support Licensure Upon Graduation.
It's easy to stand outside and say "that organization is screwed up". If you think AIA should change you should join and start being the change you want to see in the world. Otherwise you're just not paying attention to the change that *is* already happening. (As Ken said, yes the voting and debate around the resolutions at the annual meeting was a clusterfuck, but 1. that is the nature of groups with many voices and 2. my understanding is that many of the problems arose due to the fact that the structure of the organization is in flux and how approved resolutions would be implemented is a big question at this point in time.)
So to paraphrase you from another thread, your vitriolic hyperbole is obfuscating the actual facts of the situation. Put up or shut up.
BulgarBlogger
May 17, 15 4:38 pm
Notice how Kanye got an HONORABLE doctorate...
These kind of doctorates are not earned... they are given out... as long as you have an audience that doesn't know any better and buys into your shit, you can get one too...Ask Kanye about musical theory and how to read music... I bet you he can't do that... he pays someone else to do that... I don't consider people like that doctors at anything, just as much as I don't consider someone who doesn't know how to build an architect. I recently watched the movie "Bottleshock" about how the Chardonay from Chateaux Montelena in Napa Valley outranked the French Wines and brought Napa Valley onto the world stage of wine making... one of my favorite lines in that movie was about how you become a great wine maker with soil and earth under your nails... you can't just sit back and let everyone else do the "dirty" work and claim all the credit. Well... I guess you can't... but I don't think you'll ever be great and you certainly will never have my respect... Same thing in Architecture....
DTL DWG
May 17, 15 5:05 pm
honorable mentions, bull shit tasks force.....
this problem is not that fuckin' complicated.
we are all Architects who studied it, walked into it.....those who deal with municipalities are
you guessed it
Licensed Architects
in the future FAIA's will be given out to unlicensed architects....
oh wait, Pritzker's have gone to non US licensed architects....no?
fuck this shit, I'm gardening rockin' out to Sleepy LaBeef and some Pink Flloyd!
oh wait did I make to post with my real name! beer may be involved....
and whoever at NJ state licensing board thought it was funny to add a an R to my seal, because my license doc does spell my name correctly and the STATE issued seal apparently added an R, the drawings I just submitted are for a Consumer Affairs investigator for the Construction industry....good luck buddy...or do me a favor don't fuck with legit shit like that...it's not Funny.
Did I piss you off on archinect once? wtf...
May 17, 15 6:11 pm
Hold on guys, the people who write the bills submitted to the state during legislative sessions are done by AIA. That is part of what the PAC funds. 90% of the bills drafted are originally drafted by architects hiring a lawyer. In fact, you don't legally need a lawyer to draft a bill. You just have to know a little bit of how the bills are formatted and submit them along with whatever fees. Any one and I mean absolutely anyone can draft a bill provide they follow legal format and have fundamental understanding of legalese. Hell, you can hire a paralegal that went through most of law school draft it up as you discuss it.
AIA and each of the chapters have legal council. There is no money necessary to write a bill. If I wanted to, I can write and draft a legislative bill in just a couple week's time volunteeringly and then only need an hour or two of a lawyer to clean up any issues. That's only $500-$1000, Then you submit to bill to legislation with support statements and you defend it.
You don't need millions of dollars to pass a law especially when 90% of the state legislators can care less about architecture. They only care about what the financial impact on the state. Other than that, you can get just about anything passed when no one knows about the bill you are pushing until the last minute and a house rep or senator of the state being totally ignorant of the needs of the architecture profession. They pretty much confer to judgment of those pushing the bill... the architects for the needs of architecture. Unless AIA has another association appearing before the state lesislative sessions opposing AIA, AIA can just about write whatever bill they want and it gets passed/approved.
Alot of the times, the laws passed are written by AIA. The state house of representatives and state senators don't draft bills on this kinds of stuff because they don't care about this stuff because most of politicians are former lawyers or business men not usually architects.
Most of the laws impacting architectural practice are written by architect. You can be surprise how cheap a law can be passed especially on something that 90% of the politicians are ignorant and care less about so they just ask a few questions like impact on state... financially. They don't care if the laws you pass hurts yourself. The only time they care more is if there is opposition raising up issues to be concerned about.
AIA often has no opposition because the bills are not known about until it is already in lesislative process.
Just bringing this point across.
May 17, 15 6:21 pm
BulgarBlogger
Some honorable degrees are given but many times the honorable degrees are earned although it is given but given to those who earned it in what they have done. It isn't always bought by financial contribution. Of course it depends on the school. Some people have truly earned it. For example William D. Mensch of Western Design Center. Many honorary degrees are given to those who earned it by their work in the field in which an honorary degree is being granted for. Some people earned it by their experience even though they haven't had the so called formal degree. Especially pioneers of a new field because their wasn't such degrees at the time.
Keep that in mind.
DTL DWG
May 17, 15 7:02 pm
and balkins don't distract....
I'm yelling at some insulated douchebag with a state job who thinks it's funny to mess with real peoples lives!
May 17, 15 7:13 pm
who?
DTL DWG
May 17, 15 7:18 pm
don't know yet Balkin's...but seriously they issued me a STATE seal with an extra R on TEETER.....TEETERR
how does that shit happen?
nevermind the hate mail over years of not having a license?!?!?
I'm with jla-X on so many levels...no joke
and I'm licensed
May 17, 15 7:28 pm
It's just an idiot staff person that's probably underpaid screwed up as a typo.
As the IT profession continues to take a stronghold on the use of the title 'architect', and the architectural institutions fail to protect the use of the title outside architecture, how do we stand up and reclaim our right of exclusive use?
in other news the AMA is asking DR.Dre to change his name to just Dre...
call your local AIA chapter, ask those bunch of do-nothings to "protect the title"
do some architecture!
let's start there.
Architects who go to architecture school will do architecture in school and when they get out will do architecture?
Dr. Pepper!
I just heard God refered to as "the architect" I called the Board to file a complaint...
How about we let go of the hangup over that word and don't try to police it at all? Those with a license to practice can use Licensed Architect or Registered Architect to differentiate themselves, no harm done, I predict it would actually increase relations between architects and the public because it isn't seen as overly controlling and unreasonable all the while being more descriptive therefore more communicative and more realistic. Might work better than trying to grab exclusive the use of a word, which just doesn't work, clearly. It should be flattering to architects that others use the word architect, not offensive. Why do you need exclusive rights to a word anyway?
Donald Rumsfeld was the architect of the Iraq War. Insurance corporations were architects of oBOMBaCare. The Architect designed and built the Matrix.
If the AIA actually had any power (or balls) it would aggressively litigate over copyright infringement and fair trade violations. Then of course everyone would have to pay to use the registered trademark of the AIA: Architect™. Think revenue steam.
^ On to something there. Lots of precedent of using protected words in different contexts.
As all these examples demonstrate, architect (like doctor) is both a title and a regular old noun. The OP states it already: there's the profession itself (somewhat regulated), and then there's that big wide world outside. Don't waste time on a crusade trying to keep software designers from using that (modified) title --until, that is, they use it to take a client or building project from you. Then, punch 'em in the face.
Make better use of your time designing buildings and learning about systems and materials. That way we can claim back the ROLE and RESPECT of 'architect' without giving a fuck about the TITLE of 'architect'.
in other news the AMA is asking DR.Dre to change his name to just Dre...
in related news, jimmy buffett is now a 'doctor,' as is kayne west.
^ the precious "public" will be so confused...
The public: "doctor jimmy buffet can you write me a perscription for vallium...my back hurts."
Jimmy: " no sorry...im not an actual 'doctor'...but I can recommend a margarita for that back pain"
i don't understand why you're so hung up on this. if you want to be an architect, be an architect. you're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggonnit people like you.
kayne west is a doctor because he fits the limits of what a doctor is, because he received a doctorate from a university in chicago. presumably that university had the right to bestow that title. kayne west is not an architect, despite the fact he many think of himself as one. the reason he's not an architect is because he didn't do the things required to become an architect.
using the title 'doctor' is not limited to medical doctor any more than using the term 'doctor' is limited to saying you're doctor who. this is actually something almost everyone understands. i'm guessing you're slow to catch with everyone else because you really feel bad about not being an architect, and you think this is somehow related. it's not. kayne west calling himself an architect would be similar, kayne west calling himself a doctor is not.
i used kayne west as an example here because jimmy buffett didn't go to gsd and pretend to know something about what we do. also, i bet jimmy buffett is better than most medical doctors at suggesting remedies to fix what ails us.
so why are you trying to assume the title architect rather than something far more useful like "Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret"?
I'm confused. Do you actually give a shit if the title has legal protection?
"If the AIA actually had any power (or balls) it would aggressively litigate over copyright infringement and fair trade violations."
The AIA is little more than a reflection of its members (and the huge number of non-member architects) who, taken collectively, rarely - if ever - agree on anything meaningful. Without reasonable consensus, the effective redress of grievances by a profession is virtually impossible. And, with only 44,000 +/- dues paying members, the AIA certainly doesn't have the financial resources needed to litigate this sort of issue.
If you really want conditions like this to change, then a prerequisite certainly would include a broad majority of the graduate architects in the country coalescing around a common set of goals and values. But, I don't expect to see that happen during my lifetime. Given these circumstances, throwing stones at the AIA is both childish and a waste of time.
file, my dad used to have that strip hanging on his wall at the office.
Screw the M Arch, get a D Arch and you can be Dr. So-and-so Architect.
I'm confused. Do you actually give a shit if the title has legal protection?
for you it's just your sense of entitlement right? i don't give a shit about your sense of entitlement. it seems jla has some other motivation. he often brings up cooking or rennaisance/classical architects to try to compare current registration to something unrelated. existing title regulation exists as a way of advertising the professional services you can provide. if you can't stamp drawings, you can't do what architects do in the communities with these regulations. 'architect' and 'registered architect' isn't really a clear distinction between the service a person can provide. they sound alike because they use the same word. if ncarb announced "registered architect" is going to mean something different than "architect," architects are pretty much the only people that will hear it.
that's why title regulation exists. you can disagree with it all you want, nobody cares. i'm just trying to help bring the conversation back to the real intent and purpose of the regulation. if you really think 'architect' is a restricted title because of chefs or michelangelo or whatever, perhaps this perspective is something to consider so you can have a more sound opinion on why you dislike the current regulation.
Curt, my motivation is simple, its to expand the discipline of architecture and stop the trend towards further detachment. I really have nothing to gain professionally as I do not design buildings for clients. I also support gay marriage, but I am not gay. I know this is hard for some people to get, but I care about the built world, and I feel that the profession is ill equipped in dealing with the demands of the 21st century as it has demonstrated thus far. My passion surrounding this issue is actually more about the overall state of the built and natural world. The hang up over title is partly symbolic of the overall lack of cooperation and community between design disciplines, that could otherwise be united in a common effort towards creating a healthier environment...Title protection is mainly about ego, and to drop that ego is the first necessary step towards cooperation and collaboration.
The chef analogy is completely relevant. I suspect that you keep bringing it up because you are troubled by it. Again, the title 'Chef" is not legally regulated, it is self regulated. Because of this, the title 'Chef' carries a connotation of quality, talent, and experience. Despite the lack of legal regulation, we don't see every tom, dick and harry calling themselves chefs do we? Its also probably more dangerous to prepare food than to prepare building plans that will be checked by others regardless, and go through approvals prior to being built....I believe 10k people die each year from food poisoning...how many die from poorly designed architecture? Anyway, the main point is that people seek chefs because they want above average food ...people seek architects because they want above average buildings...well at least they used to...If architects cannot provide above average buildings, and if the title is not one based on excellence but rather on beurocracy, then their role will be just that....reduced to nothing more than red-tape...
Lastly, what is architecture? Please answer this question...without defining architecture this debate is pointless. To me, architecture is the deliberate manipulation of space. That's all. If you intentionally manipulate space for whatever purpose, or with whatever medium, then you are an architect. Architecture is not just walls+ceilings.
I am taking a microbiology class, first words out of the professor's mouth were "Hello, scientists!" Why do you suppose scientists haven't made that a protected title?
It is interesting to observe that the most vocal against protecting the title "architect" have not done what it takes to become one. Or they are business people, lawyers, etc who have a vested interest in seeing to it that the architects who actually are architects don't circle their wagons.
Those who say, oh just keep designing better buildings, are total ignoramuses regarding the notion of working harder not smarter (leverage).
Back to your CAD saltmines and stop chiming in on that thing in which you are not qualified to speak (until you pass the examinations) beotches...
How can a term be legally protected if it was widely used in the public domain for many different activities before the attempt at protection was made?
Wow, curt, you're a real dick. kram it up your ass.
"Back to your CAD saltmines and stop chiming in on that thing in which you are not qualified to speak (until you pass the examinations) beotches..."
Only after you realize that without the unlicensed, the pathetic joke of an architecture business model wouldn't exist.
So in my experience... I did all the work (from pre-design to CDs), plotted out the drawings, got Mr. Clown's stamp from the little box, and inked the stamp & stamped the drawings.
Then, Mr. Clown, RA, AIA, came in and sat down, looked over my work, signed his name, and kept 4 out of every 5 dollars that were paid for the project.
So has this happened to anyone else who isn't an Architect? Probably not. This is probably a rare and unique situation that I encountered. It wouldn't be a standard practice for this in any real respectable profession. I'm sure it doesn't happen anywhere else.
Or does it?
I did hear of a brain surgeon who would come in to the operating theater at the end of an operation and sew in the last few sutures during close-up and charge the patient for work on the whole procedure from diagnosis to aneurysm-fixin' & followup.
The actual surgery itself was conducted by a guy who went through Medical School and had been doing surgeries for years, but he'd not gotten in enough hours of "Contract Negotiation" to get out of his residency and take his Doctor tests. So he's basically the Janitor. Or Janitor's assistant (he hadn't passed his janitor test either).
Good point Pete...Maybe architecture employees should unionize and refuse to do the work of an architect until they are recognized as such.
This NCARB decision is exactly what I expected...nothing...They basically said that they will no longer use the title intern, which was never a mandated title anyways...so basically they will change IDP to DP...haha DP.
+++Menona
I know a woman who managed and designed projects all over the world...she never got locally licensed because she was basically working globally...working for a big firm...moving every year...A license would be pointless...She was referred to by peers as an architect, her title on the company website was architect, but she is not licensed...What is she then? Certainly not an intern, not a CAD monkey....
She's an entitled, unqualified ignoramus. QED
hi - i am a licensed architect. when i wasnt licensed i said not being allowed to call yourself an architect was stupid. i receieved letters from the state when i went to apply for exams because my website had versions of the word architecure on it. i have my licenses now (2 states) and i still think not allowing people who studied architecture or via some non traditional route practice some form of drawing and building design to call themselves Architects is STILL stupid.........like jla-x is stating it damages the potential business growth opportunities of architecture and alienates us further from society.........tintt said it at the top - architects and licensed architects. end of story.
The recent position of NCARB to do away with the horrendously offensive, belittling title of "intern" is a step in the right direction. What actually does become the replacement of the title "intern" remains to be seen. How can they possibly pick anything worse? (wait. don't answer that -one must not hold their breath though, given NCARB's and the AIA's perilously derelict if not outright offensively passive disregard for the interests of intelligent young up and coming architects: they just might outdo themselves and no one paying attention will actually be surprised).
Their first step in the right direction in the last few years was to tear down the wall between graduation from an accredited school and the immediate availability to take the A.R.E. (tear down the ridiculous requirement to first complete the ambiguous path through, around, over, under etc the IDP program).
If one is smart enough they are smart enough. Get out of the way parasitic bureaucrats!
Moving forward, the NCARB needs to figure out how to implement an A.I.T. examination (a mini A.R.E. of the same difficulty in terms of challenging the old IQ) which would immediately follow graduation from an accredited school. And yes, after passing, A.I.T.'s would be Architects In Training.
Then, during the experience (formerly referred to as IDP) and examinationSSSSSSS (stop referring to the exam as if its one simple examination) phases along the path towards licensure, the A.I.T. needs to be seriously mentored, trained, coached and provided with every opportunity to become a licensed architect after the requisite time and examinations are completed during a Residency in an architecture firm. Resident and Architect In Training.
The profession has hobbled itself for far too long by forcing the exceptional up and coming architect to putter along at the same level for years with the legions of drafters clogging up the design process.
If an individual is smart and disciplined professionally enough to get into and then graduate from an accredited school, take and pass all divisions of a rigorous IQ test (the ARE), and successfully complete the requisite years of experience, the profession needs to get the hell out of these people's way so the profession as a while can reap the benefits.
Then, step out of the way and let the inevitable, incessant whining of the unlicen-sable continue to provide them with the passive aggressive motivation necessary to get all the drafting done so their cohorts among the similarly intelligence-challenged within the lower levels of the food chain within society can continue on continuing on with their senseless, linear algorithyms aka zombie production which is necessary to perpetuate breathing, eating, sleeping etc made necessary by the overbearing influence of their medulla oblongatas, to the exclusion of a functionally significant prefrontal cortex. Whine on unlicensables...
sorry for offending you sneaky. in the future i will endeavor to say less mean things in your direction. i had posts in my mind from you previously that i couldn't go back and find, so i think it was mix-up in my head. the vitriol pointed at you was wrong, and was my mistake.
Do Architects In Training get special uniforms?
Probably not needed Miles.
Seeing as Engineers in Training are taken very seriously by the marketplace and awarded commensurately for their intelligence and discipline in preparing for, taking and passing (not to mention the same attributes applied to their profession as a whole as reflected in the resources allocated and organized to set up the E.I.T.) their entrance exam, and they do not wear special uniforms: precedent points to uniforms being a rather hollow gesture.
The day the better paid and more roundly respected engineering professions take up a policy of uniforms will be the time to consider it for architecture as well.
How about "Naval Architects", are they allowed to use the term?
technically, foreign architects are no longer architects once they step on US soil. Ando, Ban, Zumthor....All Cad monkeys or interns
yes and no, jla-x. They are simply not qualified to practice architecture for projects within a state in the United States due to not being licensed in that particular state.
They can still practice architecture for a project in their country even if they happen to be on U.S. soil. It is about the location of the project or basis of facts such as if you are offering to do services for someone in the states for a project located in the state.
Volunteer,
That depends. In Oregon, naval architects are exempt under ORS 671.030 if I recall correctly. They are exempt because their work doesn't involve buildings and if it did, it usually is federal and that again would take them outside the purview of Oregon state laws when it pertains to federal enclaves with sole-federal jurisdiction or where only criminal state laws apply not civil laws that doesn't apply.
Yes, NCARB punted, and yes the verbal gymnastics with regard to the press release was stunningly myopic. NCARB needed to have the task force, especially those ARE candidates, and newly licensed professionals speak their experience on the task force and how the decision was arrived. Yes, NCARB's changes affect their internal dialog, when dealing with a candidate, however, the griping about the AIA's role here completely here only demonstrates the ones naivete about the issue. The AIA is screwed up, I witnessed that first hand at the Saturday business meeting in Atlanta, but your barking up the wrong tree about responsibility for regulating the term architect; it's each individual state Board, and in my state, the legislature that's responsible, the AIA has zero to do with writing laws, they only have $260k in PAC money, hardly buys a cappuccino in Washington.
Because the states acquiesce most of their authority on all things governing the profession to NCARB, though, they definitely by default lead each state bull gently by the nose ring.
Eventually the NCARB's position will have a ripple effect.
Agreed: the AIA is majorly screwed up. They don't represent the interests (i.e. mostly business development) of most practicing architects. They are intent on focusing dues and activities on the interests of the bureaucrats who play Wizard of Oz behind the curtain.
Their latest Look Up campaign or whatever it is once again proves that they are entirely focused on impressing other architects instead of communicating the value of the profession to the average everyday joe who hires architects or who might hire architects (the campaign as is typical is like opening an Arch Record wherein its merely eye candy overload with precious little substance; so little in fact the average business person within the marketplace finds the effort to pay attention nauseating and vertigo-inducing. Its ridiculous. Once again the campaign is merely architects speaking to other architects who are collectively gripped by the self aggrandizing ego mania which in the end only says, "look how cool this advertisement is that we put together, doesn't it just tickle your iris to no end?"
Good_Knight, you must not have been hanging around here for the last 18 months since the Emerging Professionals Summit at which the AIA, NCARB, ACSA, and NAAB formulated and immediately began implementing changes based on the deeply-held understanding by these organizations that education and practice of architecture, especially for young professionals, is changing drastically and the organizations all need to change as well to keep up.
The AIA's RePositioning started two years ago, and the organization is already restructuring.
NCARB's Future Title Task Force and Licensure Upon Graduation initiatives are in full force, with the report on the use of the word "intern" being the first step, and the proposals due in January from 32 (IIRC) schools that are considering curriculum changes to support Licensure Upon Graduation.
It's easy to stand outside and say "that organization is screwed up". If you think AIA should change you should join and start being the change you want to see in the world. Otherwise you're just not paying attention to the change that *is* already happening. (As Ken said, yes the voting and debate around the resolutions at the annual meeting was a clusterfuck, but 1. that is the nature of groups with many voices and 2. my understanding is that many of the problems arose due to the fact that the structure of the organization is in flux and how approved resolutions would be implemented is a big question at this point in time.)
So to paraphrase you from another thread, your vitriolic hyperbole is obfuscating the actual facts of the situation. Put up or shut up.
Notice how Kanye got an HONORABLE doctorate...
These kind of doctorates are not earned... they are given out... as long as you have an audience that doesn't know any better and buys into your shit, you can get one too...Ask Kanye about musical theory and how to read music... I bet you he can't do that... he pays someone else to do that... I don't consider people like that doctors at anything, just as much as I don't consider someone who doesn't know how to build an architect. I recently watched the movie "Bottleshock" about how the Chardonay from Chateaux Montelena in Napa Valley outranked the French Wines and brought Napa Valley onto the world stage of wine making... one of my favorite lines in that movie was about how you become a great wine maker with soil and earth under your nails... you can't just sit back and let everyone else do the "dirty" work and claim all the credit. Well... I guess you can't... but I don't think you'll ever be great and you certainly will never have my respect... Same thing in Architecture....
honorable mentions, bull shit tasks force.....
this problem is not that fuckin' complicated.
we are all Architects who studied it, walked into it.....those who deal with municipalities are
you guessed it
Licensed Architects
in the future FAIA's will be given out to unlicensed architects....
oh wait, Pritzker's have gone to non US licensed architects....no?
fuck this shit, I'm gardening rockin' out to Sleepy LaBeef and some Pink Flloyd!
oh wait did I make to post with my real name! beer may be involved....
and whoever at NJ state licensing board thought it was funny to add a an R to my seal, because my license doc does spell my name correctly and the STATE issued seal apparently added an R, the drawings I just submitted are for a Consumer Affairs investigator for the Construction industry....good luck buddy...or do me a favor don't fuck with legit shit like that...it's not Funny.
Did I piss you off on archinect once? wtf...
Hold on guys, the people who write the bills submitted to the state during legislative sessions are done by AIA. That is part of what the PAC funds. 90% of the bills drafted are originally drafted by architects hiring a lawyer. In fact, you don't legally need a lawyer to draft a bill. You just have to know a little bit of how the bills are formatted and submit them along with whatever fees. Any one and I mean absolutely anyone can draft a bill provide they follow legal format and have fundamental understanding of legalese. Hell, you can hire a paralegal that went through most of law school draft it up as you discuss it.
AIA and each of the chapters have legal council. There is no money necessary to write a bill. If I wanted to, I can write and draft a legislative bill in just a couple week's time volunteeringly and then only need an hour or two of a lawyer to clean up any issues. That's only $500-$1000, Then you submit to bill to legislation with support statements and you defend it.
You don't need millions of dollars to pass a law especially when 90% of the state legislators can care less about architecture. They only care about what the financial impact on the state. Other than that, you can get just about anything passed when no one knows about the bill you are pushing until the last minute and a house rep or senator of the state being totally ignorant of the needs of the architecture profession. They pretty much confer to judgment of those pushing the bill... the architects for the needs of architecture. Unless AIA has another association appearing before the state lesislative sessions opposing AIA, AIA can just about write whatever bill they want and it gets passed/approved.
Alot of the times, the laws passed are written by AIA. The state house of representatives and state senators don't draft bills on this kinds of stuff because they don't care about this stuff because most of politicians are former lawyers or business men not usually architects.
Most of the laws impacting architectural practice are written by architect. You can be surprise how cheap a law can be passed especially on something that 90% of the politicians are ignorant and care less about so they just ask a few questions like impact on state... financially. They don't care if the laws you pass hurts yourself. The only time they care more is if there is opposition raising up issues to be concerned about.
AIA often has no opposition because the bills are not known about until it is already in lesislative process.
Just bringing this point across.
BulgarBlogger
Some honorable degrees are given but many times the honorable degrees are earned although it is given but given to those who earned it in what they have done. It isn't always bought by financial contribution. Of course it depends on the school. Some people have truly earned it. For example William D. Mensch of Western Design Center. Many honorary degrees are given to those who earned it by their work in the field in which an honorary degree is being granted for. Some people earned it by their experience even though they haven't had the so called formal degree. Especially pioneers of a new field because their wasn't such degrees at the time.
Keep that in mind.
and balkins don't distract....
I'm yelling at some insulated douchebag with a state job who thinks it's funny to mess with real peoples lives!
who?
don't know yet Balkin's...but seriously they issued me a STATE seal with an extra R on TEETER.....TEETERR
how does that shit happen?
nevermind the hate mail over years of not having a license?!?!?
I'm with jla-X on so many levels...no joke
and I'm licensed
It's just an idiot staff person that's probably underpaid screwed up as a typo.
Teet-err.
Like Teet, err not so much.
teeterrrrrrrrrrr