I am taking my belongings and going home. I have taken PPD and PDD each 3 times now and failed each time. Three times is the limit I set for myself so I am done with this racket. I have passed all content areas on PPD and PDD, but they jump around like a shell game. The fact that I can pass a content area with a score of 1, then receive a score of 4 in the same content area on a different attempt, says to me that these exams don't accurately/consistently measure input. Passing PDD/PPD is more like pulling a slot machine lever and hoping for all cherries on the same line: it's not about passing 1 exam, it's about passing 5 exams at once.
With planners, engineers, code professionals, attorneys, project managers, construction managers, fire/life safety professionals, architectural designers, interior designers, etc, I am not sure why architects exist at all. The profession in its current form is obsolete, decision-makers (AIA/NCARB/NAAB) stifle competition, and thus stifle innovation. The discipline could learn from the engineering model: have one general exam and optional speciality exams such as: envelope, sustainability, accessibility, thermal, research. But this will never happen because it would expose the giant fissure in the discipline: there is nothing an architect does that can't be done by somebody else. Thus the discipline holds on to this archaic model because to change would mean acknowledgment of the fissure. Architecture education is based on an 18-century model and licensure is based on a 19th-century model of the architect as an Howard Rourke ideal. Current architecture discipline is antiquated like a Victorian house: it’s pretty to look at but it’s not applicable to life today because it’s based on obsolete principles. Licensure can be likened to Blockbuster Video in our Netflix economy: it's out of touch with modern times. Not only are the exams like using MS-DOS, but the questions have nothing to do with practice.
I don’t know if my thoughts will help anybody but I know many test takers are struggling like I was. Here is how I arrived at this decision to quit: a license is nothing more than a rented piece of paper from your state and you (I) do not need a piece of paper to do what you want (unless you want to stamp a drawing, and I could not care less about that). But if you want to do design, you do not need a license. For me, it wasn't just the cash up-front, but it’s the time spent studying, the stress, the opportunity costs, the constant gray cloud following me around: study, study, study, gotta pass, gotta pass, my future depends on it. If I wasn't studying, I couldn't enjoy whatever else I was doing. The reality is that, “No," my future does not depend on a license. In fact, a license might be a hindrance and prevent me from seeing/seeking other opportunities. A license might pigeon-hole me.
It might be a bit more pricey, but if you are on the fence about licensure, consider getting another degree - at least it’s not rented; you own it for life. I earned an MPA in 2.5 years at night for about $17k from a state U and it was LESS stressful than attempting licensure! If you can get through a B. Arch, you can easily do a Master's in another field. My MPA has increased my earning potential much more than a license would have and it has widened my marketability. I have parlayed into code development which has no visible ceiling that I can see, and there are no arbitrary or inflated license/cert/registration requirements. I wanted the license to validate my efforts, but I realized that validation is not a good reason for becoming licensed. And as somebody on Architect has said: architecture just isn’t important enough to get stressed about. I will say it again: architecture just isn't that important. In fact, some states are attempting to deregulate architecture to increase competition and innovation, and to break up the monopoly that a handful of organizations have on the discipline (AIA/NCARB/NAAB). I support this. Competition breeds innovation and architecture is in dire need of innovation. Can you imagine if medical professionals resisted innovation to the point that in 2020, the practice of medicine was the same as it was in 1920? I think architecture is the only discipline that has done this and consequently, architects are not relevant - they are seen as a necessary burden, as something to be haggled with and swept aside.
If you are struggling, wondering if it's worth it, or simply getting tired of paying $$ to be on the hamster wheel, my advice: set a limit for yourself and if you are not licensed by that time, walk away and don't look back because ARE 5.0 is designed for people to fail - it's not you, you are not stupid; ARE is a money-making racket. How do you think the executive quarter-million dollar salaries at NCARB are funded? Every minute (year) spent on this process is time NOT spent doing something else that may pay off more like a better job, a different career path, another certification, another degree, time with family, learning piano, your happiness, etc... Architecture just isn't that important, certainly not as important as other architects would have people believe. Understanding this is especially important for those of you who are in your early 30's or younger... I am almost 40 and I wish that I had cut the cord 8 years ago. I am grateful for my Master's degree and subsequent opportunities, but the time and $$ I have applied toward the licensure process will never be returned to me and looking back, it was a total waste. The things I could have done instead would have brought me much more joy. I wish I had listened less to architects: architects spent their youth, money, and career on the BS process so you doing the same thing validates their loss. It's perpetual. Break the cycle.
Non Sequitur
Aug 10, 20 9:01 pm
You're right, architects and architecture are no-where near as important as we were told to believe we were. Now... if only the length/cost of education were reduced to reflect this, then we'd have far fewer disgruntled people who otherwise might have done just fine. Just don't tell that to those $100K in debt design school graduates. They are equal, nay, better than doctors and lawyers because studio is sooooo fucking demanding.
It's worth noting that this is mostly an american problem. Plenty of other countries have modernized the licensing process AND subsidize post-secondary education. M'erica!
square.
Aug 11, 20 9:11 am
can you point to any problems with the profession? we've seen your opinion, quite often, that education is the problem because it sets overinflated standards and produces "underdeveloped" graduates (to which i somewhat agree and disagree). any critiques on where we spend the bulk of our time in this discipline?
genuine question.
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 9:37 am
Appreciate the genuine question and agree with your summary. My pov here is that prof-practice needs to be treated as more important than studio (because it is)... and should be a perpetual course (like most graduate level thesis projects) that spans the entirety of the M.arch instead of one or two courses that can be glazed over near the end of your degree. I just can't take anyone seriously when they claim their arch education is hard because they spent 80hrs per week on studio work. Studio is the easy stuff. Construction and prof-prac is the hard stuff.
square.
Aug 11, 20 9:43 am
to be fair, you probably thought it was hard when you were doing it. i only push back because i think you tend to present things from a present-dominant narrative, which devalues the difficulty of architecture school at times. just because we're professional architects in this moment doesn't mean our experience is more real or valuable than a current students. i distinctly remember that architecture school was the hardest thing i had ever done while i was doing it, and honestly i think my job is a lot easier in many ways. the mental fortitude required to get through school is pretty demanding, and anyone who can do it should be commended.
that being said, i tend to agree.. education should probably more closely mirror where the profession is. my problem is i don't like where the profession is, and i worry it's only getting worse with more and more consultants, technology, software, etc to manage, not to mention any of the issues relating to money. in other words i think architecture is wrapped up in some pretty big systemic forces that we can't affect, and i'm not sure it's a grind i can keep at.
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 10:16 am
I don't intend to state that studio is not challenging. I was that night owl student constantly in studio t'il 3-5am (hand drawings and wood models... so, there was a fair amount of labour involved) but I also worked in an office between my studio and other courses so I had a decent understanding of the difference between school and work. I just don't agree that the focus of school should be on design studio. Encourage creative &critical problem solving by all means, but pump out grads that know a thing or two about the built-world instead of indebted and disgruntled idealists.
square.
Aug 11, 20 10:23 am
hey now- i'm an indebted, disgruntled realist
joseffischer
Aug 11, 20 12:16 pm
Studio: getting a B was easy, getting an A was hard. You really had to not try AND ignore/fight whatever your professor said to get a C. I never got a studio A during a semester that my side work picked up. I had a professor chat with me for a long time about some projects that most likely were "A" material on how I wasn't choosing my priorities correctly... it was a competition semester and I got an honorable mention and my B. I think back on that now and then and remind myself he was right, I worried way too much about studio. Glad the sidework taught me construction and kept my bills low.
square.
Aug 11, 20 12:55 pm
yes, i guess another way of summarizing it for me: i think the design-focused curriculum used to be appropriate preparation for a career in architecture (major asterisk here as the neo-liberal cult of personality has been a terrible influence on this since the 80s), but that's no longer the case, which makes me sad. i can see how those interested by the more technical side of the profession are content with the work but not the education.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 1:33 pm
I've had discussions with a former professor regarding the courses that have been the most helpful in actual practice. Without hesitation I told him that pro practice and materials and methods of construction were the most helpful. Other lecture courses were also near the top (they were also quite helpful for ARE preparation). Studios were formative, but not to the extent that schools and students prioritize them. This professor had been wondering if we shouldn't be getting rid of a few studio courses and filling in with other courses more directly relatable to practice. I would have loved to have more pro practice curriculum with a professor that actually enjoyed teaching it.
BTW, courses in software (AutoCAD and 3DS Max) have been the least helpful in my career. Caveat: I was fairly fluent in ACAD from a computer-aided drafting class in high school, otherwise it would have been more helpful.
mightyaa
Aug 11, 20 2:42 pm
I think a flaw in your argument NS is the emphasis on design... That is the school and educators. But if you look at the NAAB accreditation requirements, AXP requirements and ARE test stuff all tracked by NCARB... design IS NOT a big part or emphasis; it is the prof-practice stuff. So we need to beat on the colleges that make studio the primary focus.
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 7:39 pm
Mighty, that’s right, but how many people who come here to complain claim they need more money because prof practice courses were so demanding? Anyways, we have the same accreditation reqs up here and our exams have maybe a dozen design questions (out of 400ish).
sameolddoctor
Aug 11, 20 10:08 pm
100k debt? I know a lot of peeps from schools like Sci-Arc (NOT Ivy League) that have 300k debt. Idiots.
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 11:21 pm
^F
ɯɥɐp
Aug 13, 20 1:33 pm
"that being said, i tend to agree.. education should probably more closely mirror where the profession is."
square—
FFS didn't we just have a discussion in another thread where after I complained that architecture schools are producing too many designers and not enough individuals with practical skills that are more aligned with what the profession needs to innovate an be more relevant... then you said that you question whether licensing should exist to begin with? What's with the sudden change of heart?
natematt
Aug 10, 20 9:58 pm
Your opinion is representative of your own experience. I would agree with NS about the cost of education, and with you about some of your points, particularly on validation. However, while I think everyone hates it, for many the testing isn't that big of an impact on their life.
People have different ways of thinking, and the nature of testing to evaluate your ability as an architect is pretty lame.
papd
Aug 13, 20 11:29 pm
AIA,architecture schools and NCARB have refused to change with the times.The writing is on the wall;Technology will change the role of architects and developers will have the last laugh.Allowing AIA members to determine who gets licensed through internships has led to a profession that does not reflect the underlying demographics of society and therefore contributed to social ills instead of being the custodian of social solutions.
tduds
Aug 10, 20 10:06 pm
The process sucks, and I'm sure it locks out as many potentially great architects as it allows in extremely incompetent architects. I'd love to see some major overhaul of the licensing process.
That said I think architects are still very much a necessary profession and some form of accreditation is also necessary to ensure quality in that profession. I'm not sure what an ideal would look like, but probably a lot different from what we currently have.
Just one specific bone to pick: "there is nothing an architect does that can't be done by somebody else." Strong disagree there. I view my job as similar to an orchestra conductor / composer. I may not be able to play a violin nearly as well as the first violin player, but I know more about the trombone than that violin player ever will (and vice versa). My job is to understand just enough about each to get them to play in harmony. That's valuable.
midlander
Aug 11, 20 4:40 am
excellent analogy
John W. Schrader
Aug 12, 20 6:01 pm
Great Analogy. One that stuck with me was told to me by a "starchitect" in my earlier years of school....... 'Engineers/specialists know everything about one thing, and Architects know a little about a lot of things'. We are one of the last good generalist professions, and in terms of design/construction can "see the forest for the trees" when others cant.
tduds
Aug 13, 20 12:35 pm
I had an Environmental Controls (HVAC, lighting, etc) prof in grad school who perfectly summed up how I approach the profession: "I'm not here to teach you how to do this, I'm here to teach you enough to know when your consultants are lying to you."
Sign up for the ARE Facebook group on Facebook. They have tons of good resources and have a really solid community with people who are going through the same pain as you. Just do a search in that group and you will find amazing support and help from posts. Don't give up!! You are so close! Good luck.
Bammerdon
Aug 11, 20 2:07 am
Yeah, I have read the responses and sifted through the emotional stuff (Non Sequiter, don't you have architecture to practice versus empty opinions to offer?). Nobody has clarified what architects do that isn't offered by others... it's the same empty argument about health and safety which is what the gov't uses when there is no other argument to support a gov't program. The failure here is to demonstrate what architects do that cannot be done by others. Architects are NOT equal to doctors or engineers. By all means, provide inarguable, substantive evidence that architects do something that is not done by another discipline and I swear I will make your night worth while if you are in N CA. But you cannot. Architects are now pathetic generalists and everybody else that is not licensed is making the money that architects should be making. But architects gave away the money decades ago because it was more important to look glamorous than it was to get fingers dirty. Northern Cali, anyone?
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 6:07 am
Unfortunately for you, I am correct with my “empty opinions”.
flatroof
Aug 11, 20 10:36 am
" Imagine some jackass building an ammonium nitrate facility just outside city limits where the city has no jurisdiction in a county where there is no adopted code by the county. Imagine if it was negligently designed and built. It can be a serious disaster."
It did happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fertilizer_Company_explosion
tduds
Aug 11, 20 12:24 pm
Yeah, I have read the responses and sifted through the emotional stuff ... Nobody has clarified what architects do that isn't offered by others...
I don't think you did because I did.
natematt
Aug 11, 20 2:34 am
I mean.... I can give you an answer that is 100% accurate, and you'll owe me that north cal dream night... but it will be a dick answer... if you really want it, just ask....
So... in place of that. Lets flip the question. Do you think that buildings can be built with entirely specialist teams? Or do you just think that other people can take the place of the generalist architect?
If it's the latter, then aren't you just replacing the architect with... the architect by another name?
If it's the former... well I can't see how anyone who's ever worked with consultants would envision that going well... It would be funny...
joseffischer
Aug 11, 20 12:21 pm
this person has clearly not reviewed shop drawings and dealt with the growth of "by others" in our field. My job is daily about getting the "experts" in the room together and asking "who's supposed to know how your part fits to yours" and both of them shrugging. Then I have to let them know how it's going to happen.
TeenageWasteland
Aug 11, 20 11:33 pm
@joseffischer that's the part I hate the most in architectural practice... telling people how to do their jobs (properly). I once worked with a global engineering consulting firm that the entire team (Strct,MEP, facade...etc ) never communicate internally before turning up to the meeting.... bloody nightmare.
natematt
Aug 30, 20 2:10 am
It's not just the coordination either, it's problem solving, the amount of time that "i'm not an (person's profession), but couldn't you do _____" has solved a problem for me blows my mind.
midlander
Aug 11, 20 4:41 am
perhaps one needs to know what architects do to pass these tests.
joseffischer
Aug 11, 20 12:22 pm
I already commented but I wish I hadn't. This is the best one-liner response to the question/rant.
Wilma Buttfit
Aug 11, 20 8:52 am
Sounds like you are almost there. Don't give up just before you finish!
You actually make a good argument to hire an architect. Why would anyone hire planners, engineers, code professionals, attorneys, project managers, construction managers, fire/life safety professionals, architectural designers, interior designers, etc, and try to get them to all work together when you can hire an architect?
mightyaa
Aug 11, 20 2:49 pm
As well as have someone, who understands all that, set priorities and give direction and balance the consultants. Ever seen a building designed by an engineer or a code professional? You can pretty much guess at what will be developed and refined, and what is an afterthought. So you end up with exposed conduit just in case you need to work on and service the wiring after a weather event :P
Wilma Buttfit
Aug 11, 20 9:02 am
I used to tutor candidates. I would tell them NCARB assumes you can do your job. They assume you can architect. What they test you on is a lot of fringe stuff, they test you on what other people do. They test on HSW topics including construction costs (financial welfare) and your ability to be responsive to the needs of the public and interact with government authorities and best practices because that is what separates someone with knowledge and experience from a professional.
I think you are writing here because you don't want to give up. Don't.
Chad Miller
Aug 11, 20 9:52 am
Keep trying. Becoming an architect is difficult. Nothing worthwhile is easy.
thatsthat
Aug 11, 20 10:25 am
I wanted the license to validate my efforts, but I realized that validation is not a good reason for becoming licensed.
It sounds like you really just want to design. If you don't want to do work that licensed architects do, then why get a license? If you want to design, go be a designer. Let someone licensed do the heavy lifting in getting your designs realized. Nothing wrong with that if you find an office that works in that way. Not everyone needs to have a license. Architects are the team. leaders and decision makers. We get all of those specialists together and help them speak the same language to keep the project on track. We talk listen to the owner and make sure they understand where their money is going.
Superfluous Squirrel
Aug 11, 20 10:50 am
This is a feature not a bug.
The point of NCARB and the AREs is to make getting a license hard and complicated. It keeps people out and prices high. If the tests actually reflected the dificulty of our profession there would be twice as many architects, and everyone would make half as much money.
tduds
Aug 11, 20 11:11 am
"...and prices high." I dunno about that.
Superfluous Squirrel
Aug 11, 20 11:15 am
You really think clients would pay more if there were more architects?
square.
Aug 11, 20 11:17 am
number of licensed architects has less impact on value than the number of unlicensed design and production staff who are doing the work under them; that's where the labor laws of supply and demand come into play. licensure has more to do with who gets to call the shots within the profession. if you actually wanted to affect compensation from the credentialed side, there would be a fee schedule, but we know what happened there...
tduds
Aug 11, 20 12:18 pm
You really think clients would pay more if there were fewer architects?
Superfluous Squirrel
Aug 11, 20 1:16 pm
The fewer architects that bid on a job the higher the winning bid is going to be. It seems like basic supply and demand to me. Do you have an argument as why hiring an architect would be any different?
square.
Aug 11, 20 1:40 pm
yes, reality. you began your post stating that prices are high, which is the first time i've heard anyone say that architects are paid well. the burden of proof is on you.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 1:45 pm
The architectural service economy doesn't simply follow basic supply and demand economics. While not truly inelastic, the services architects provide have somewhat inelastic demand thanks to a government-granted monopoly to licensed individuals on architectural services. Not to mention that the services those licensed individuals provide are not commodity-like services.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 1:50 pm
Also, the point of NCARB and ARE is not to make getting a license complicated. It's to make it a measure of competency. Argue that it doesn't fulfill the purpose of measuring competency if you want to, but they aren't setting out trying to make it complicated for the sake of complication and difficulty. The test is set up to establish what a minimally competent architect would know. If you pass that bar, you pass the test. Setting that bar is complicated and it's not a perfect system ... I'm not saying it can't be better. But your off target if you think they are making it difficult just for fun.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 2:33 pm
I appreciate your willingness to jump in where you know little Rick, but maybe sit this one out before you broadcast your lack of knowledge even more.
Superfluous Squirrel
Aug 11, 20 3:27 pm
"high" prices is all relative. Just because we all wish clients paid more doesn't mean they couldn't possibly pay less. Just to be clear, I'm claiming firm profits will go down, not necessarily that wages will go down. The more people that are bidding on a job, the more likely it is that someone will undercut you because they are OK with taking less profit, or taking the job at cost becasue they need any job to keep going. Im sure you can see it whenever theres a slowdown, but I don't have any data to back it up.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 3:56 pm
One flaw in your argument is that you assume clients are shopping for architects primarily based on price. I'm sure there is a segment of the industry where this happens, but it's a pretty small segment of the industry in my estimation. Your argument is more apropos to describing contractors competing and bidding on construction work rather than architects competing with each other for design work.
Wilma Buttfit
Aug 11, 20 4:44 pm
Clients are interested in value, not price.
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 5:37 pm
Pretty big swing and miss there ballerina.
Non Sequitur
Aug 11, 20 5:37 pm
Pretty big swing and miss there ballerina.
midlander
Aug 11, 20 7:19 pm
in private sector architects can price too low and disqualify themselves. i've worked at a developer and seen this happen. 4 firms invited to submit rfp, 3 are +/- 10% of our target, the other was 40% under target. we assumed that firm either misunderstood what we were asking for or planned to understaff the project. experienced clients don't want their project to fall behind schedule to save 2% of cost on fees.
midlander
Aug 11, 20 7:22 pm
it is not at all like buying apples, because the "product" doesn't exist yet so you can't actually compare cheap apples to regular ones. But you also know that the cost of labor / services is roughly similar within any market so you can expect any much cheaper one is just going to give you less.
square.
Aug 11, 20 7:47 pm
this metaphor is not working.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 8:10 pm
Balkins' return to the forums is not working.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 8:28 pm
For the sake of the metaphor ... the client goes to the farmer's market and asks a bunch of architects to give them proposals for a bag of apples. The architects figure out the apples they can put in the bag and the price they think is appropriate. Client looks at the proposals and picks one of the architects. The client isn't simply focused on price per bag (or price per apple) as a simple supply and demand economy would lead you to believe. Instead, they are looking at the bags and the apples they contain to select the bag they think fits their program the best. Then they try to get the architect to lower the price of the bag of apples. They also try to get the architect to include additional apples for no added cost.
Balkins comes into this metaphor because he's the guy outside the market with a bag of wadded up balls of red paper he learned about at Clatsop County CC. He says they are close enough to apples but he can only sell them as apples in Sweden, or he can only sell one of them as an exempt apple as long as the paper ball is less than 4 inches in diameter per Oregon's practice law (but he's the one holding the tape measure and won't allow anyone else to read it). He also goes online and tries to talk with architects about what it is like to cultivate and grow apples despite never having done it before.
senjohnblutarsky
Aug 11, 20 12:13 pm
It's not enough to study for just one section. You have to be a well rounded individual to pass. They put questions from other sections on each exam. This is a known thing.
I didn't fail any sections under 4.0. I'm not perfect by any means. So, that should imply its certainly doable.
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 1:57 pm
PPD and PDD are pretty comprehensive tests under 5.0. You can't really pass them without knowing a lot of material. In that way, I think they are a better test for competency of well-rounded individuals. Every person I know that had taken the approach of studying for these tests as a way to become a better, more well-rounded, architect has done well on them. The people that I've seen struggle have been the ones that want to cram all the information into their brain, take and pass the test, then forget it.
Bench
Aug 11, 20 4:21 pm
EA - i've also been finding that approach helpful while in the process of taking my exams (3/6 down so far). Admittedly, yes, taking time away from visiting people/spending time with friends to read about contract law, etc. does kind of suck, and I'd prefer to be elsewhere. But as a method for improving my own daily value to my projects, the prep material and subsequent testing has really helped me improve my skills in the field. There's so much not covered in school, that does need to be covered at some point before getting to the coveted license - I've actually found the process of hard-nosed, head-down reading to be incredibly useful (if often a drag).
Fancy1118
Aug 11, 20 2:02 pm
Can you expand upon what you're doing with your MPA? I'm a licensed architect with a BArch. But I'm considering getting a either an MPA or MBA part time.
Quentin
Aug 11, 20 2:39 pm
LOL, tldr but you sound salty because you can't pass. They aren't that hard! They don't even have the drawing task anymore.
Cry me a river!
Chad Miller
Aug 11, 20 5:31 pm
When did you get your license Quentin?
Quentin P
Aug 11, 20 6:23 pm
2016, completed within a year
Chad Miller
Aug 11, 20 6:47 pm
So you where on the ARE 4.0?
Everyday Architect
Aug 11, 20 8:07 pm
He would have been. First scores for 5.0 tests weren't released until 2017.
Chad Miller
Aug 12, 20 2:11 pm
I thought so but couldn't recall when 5.0 kicked in.
Chad Miller
Aug 12, 20 2:13 pm
Quentin - you should know that while the 5.0 doesn't have the vignettes anymore they do have pro practice and contracts spread throughout all of the exams. While it's now five exams instead of 7 you're tested on the same amount of information. Basically all they did was cram 7 exams of questions into 5 exams.
Everyday Architect
Aug 12, 20 2:30 pm
6 exams. 5 was only for those transitioning between 4.0 and 5.0 and had passed the right ones in 4.0 first.
Chad Miller
Aug 12, 20 7:08 pm
Whoops! So 7 exams worth of questions in 6 tests. That's marginally better. :)
OM..
Aug 11, 20 7:44 pm
k bye!
Say No to Student Loans
Aug 11, 20 10:10 pm
Stop crying and blaming others for your failures.
Chad Miller
Aug 12, 20 2:14 pm
Says the unlicensed looser.
Say No to Student Loans
Aug 13, 20 8:38 pm
I'm not only licensed, I own my own practice, good try Chad.
cbiii
Aug 12, 20 9:49 am
Just saying:
1] Passing the ARE's is no more than a basic measure of competency for the profession.
2] Have a hobby for your creative outlet ... you likely will not fulfill it in the office.
Chad Miller
Aug 12, 20 2:15 pm
This can be true as to practice actual architecture you'll need to do things project management, proposals, ect. Not all of your time will be spent designing buildings.
Chemex
Aug 12, 20 9:57 am
I don't think the problem is a resistance to change. The problem is that things have changed drastically since the 1920s. In the 70s-80s, special interests took over the profession (and the world) to the point were innovation is stifled for architects--it's just a way to grease the wheel for institutions (academic, professional, etc).
Ideally, architects would have a general knowledge of all of the specialties, not a requirement of mastery for every engineering field. You rightly observe that engineers are able to specialize, while European architects have some flexibility in the process. I would be happy if architects used an early 1920s modernist process--but they have no power or will to do so anymore.
Of course the people who are rich / white enough to go through this long pointless process in order to secure a spot at YRP architects inc. is going to defend it. They have a secure 65k a year spot designing gas stations and hospitals in Denver. However the built world doesn't improve when architects are trained to be cad monkeys and 2nd class engineers who just mindlessly follow wherever the regulations lead.
tduds
Aug 12, 20 11:29 am
"special interests took over the profession" ..For example?
"I would be happy if architects used an early 1920s modernist process" Also would love some elaboration on what this process is, to you.
Everyday Architect
Aug 12, 20 12:51 pm
"Ideally, architects would have a general knowledge of all of the specialties, not a requirement of mastery for every engineering field."
This was the statement I was wondering about. How is this different today? I don't know about you all, but I feel like I have a "general knowledge of [most] specialties" rather than a "mastery for every engineering field." I don't think I know a single architect that I would think has a mastery in any type of engineering field.
archanonymous
Aug 12, 20 1:04 pm
.... except "Value Engineering"
atelier nobody
Aug 12, 20 2:14 pm
I know very damn few architects and zero engineers or construction managers who have mastery in value engineering.
Everyday Architect
Aug 12, 20 2:28 pm
does anyone have mastery in value engineering? I mean real value engineering, not cost cutting.
midlander
Aug 12, 20 8:55 pm
i despise the way terms like value engineering have snuck into the jargon in order to obscure what is they're actually describing. VE properly done implies a change that increased costs could be made if it proportionately increases value. This is never what is really desired though... since it's just an unnecessary euphemism for cost reduction.
Non Sequitur
Aug 13, 20 8:31 am
There was a time when I would deliberately add things to projects as a ruse to direct the VE efforts. Higher finishes in places that did not matter, SS handrails in egress only stairs, that sort of thing. I made it easier to negotiate on the items that mattered. Can't do that anymore tho. We work with CM offices that VE everything.
Wilma Buttfit
Aug 13, 20 9:14 am
NS that reminds me of a story I read once about a software design firm who would include a picture of a duck on every page in the software they designed so that when the client reviewed the work they would say "Looks great! Just get rid of the duck."
Non Sequitur
Aug 13, 20 9:18 am
One of my prof-prac teachers had a similar story where they would include a section in their spec book that required the GC to buy pizza for each meeting just to see if they read the docs. Only once, if I recall correctly that a GC followed through and paid for lunch. A credit for the value of future lunches was issued afterwards.
Chad Miller
Aug 13, 20 11:09 am
We did the same thing at the first firm I worked at. In the GC of the specs we had the contractor required to buy beer. No one reads the GC of the spec until there is a problem.
tduds
Aug 13, 20 12:39 pm
Ah, the Brown M&M clause. Brilliant move.
tduds
Aug 13, 20 12:41 pm
During the recession, I worked a short construction job for a certain renowned hippie environmentalist architect, and in his contract he required the client to show up at 4pm with enough beer for the whole crew. Every, single, day. Fun job.
Chad Miller
Aug 13, 20 2:30 pm
4:30 pm - nothing is square or plumb. A lot of hammers and speed squares misplaced.
archanonymous
Aug 13, 20 2:55 pm
back when i worked with my hands, the firm owner would leave on Friday to go get beers and that was all of our cue to clean up. A spotless shop upon return meant he was paying for the beer that week.
Everyday Architect
Aug 13, 20 5:56 pm
Since I'm a pedant I'll point out that the specs don't have General Conditions (GC). They have the General Requirements (Div 01). The construction agreement has the General Conditions.
tduds
Aug 14, 20 12:57 pm
That's probably an ARE question so I guess we're back on topic!
"With planners, engineers, code professionals, attorneys, project managers, construction managers, fire/life safety professionals, architectural designers, interior designers, etc, I am not sure why architects exist at all."
This idea has been shared many times, but rarely challenged. Yes it is "possible" that somehow a group of professionals could somehow create a code complaint building. Anyone who has ever worked on an actual project more complicated than a strip mall or SFR should know that this would be an absolute disaster.
My experience is that when the architect do their job well, it seems easy and like maybe an architect isn't needed. Every contractor and many of the engineer led projects that I've been a part of have been very difficult for everyone involved.
midlander
Aug 12, 20 8:59 pm
as a tangent i always bring these up when people make vague complaints about how architects mismanage costs and schedule. as if civil infrastructure projects without architecture management go any better. (the big dig, second ave subway, any airport runway expansion, power plants, etc) the main issue is that the people with expertise are rarely the ones deciding key issues of process, budget, and goals.
shellarchitect
Aug 13, 20 8:23 am
LOL! I worked for one of the big dig firms roughly 10 years ago! The firm leaders gave the architects a lot of freedom, with the exception that projects had to make money. No such thing as a "loss leader" or a low margin "prestige" project. Fortunately I was 1,000 miles away and had no connection to the Big Dig!
Wilma Buttfit
Aug 13, 20 9:18 am
Notice the original author hasn't come back to converse. This is typical of candidates who can't pass, they just want it handed to them because they have x, y, and z and deserve it. Don't be like this guy. He'll probably pass the next two if he just takes them. After all, he knows what's on the test now.
Non Sequitur
Aug 13, 20 9:19 am
OP is a disgruntled wanker who has no idea what architects do so it's no big loss. Just an old man yelling at clouds. Nothing to see here.
JLC-1
Aug 13, 20 11:22 am
he took his belongings and went home
square.
Aug 13, 20 11:36 am
yet this thread gained a lot of traction. definitely some truth to complaints regarding ncarb. i agree the exams aren't that tough, but they are unnecessarily lengthy and costly. i'm fortunate to have the adequate resources to tackle them, but not everyone does.
whistler
Aug 13, 20 4:07 pm
This seems like a fun thread ... kinda like arguing on Twitter! All I will say is that when I went to write my exams some 30+ years ago we all sat in a big gymnasium and did multiple exams per day over a three day period. I remember thinking to myself and mentioned to a few buddies who were doing the same exams ( several national award winning architects ) how I could tell why our profession was so fucked just by looking at the people writing the exams. Out of a room of 80-100 people only about 5 I would consider designers with any skill or passion the rest might as well have been techs. It was a sad sight that the majority would never make any significant contribution to the profession or be considered a model to look up to as far as a leader in the field.
Think about when you graduated and went to watch each of your classmates thesis presentations ..... how many of those folks would you actually hire to design and build you a house, someone who could design it, deliver it and understand all complexities of the structure, building performance and family dynamics and unique circumstances of a site .... I could only think of 2 guys! Happy to say I would still hire either of those guys today.
square.
Aug 13, 20 4:26 pm
alternative take: people like you, who think that only 5% of those in architecture are "real designers" and "leaders," are "why our profession [is] fucked"
whistler
Aug 13, 20 4:47 pm
I was being generous by saying that there were 5%. It's the same in every profession, think about it, not everyone needs or wants to be the Alpha Male / Female
that the profession needs. It's not an ego trip, it's a commitment.
Everyday Architect
Aug 13, 20 5:52 pm
2% is what Frankie would say...
square.
Aug 13, 20 5:55 pm
no, it's really not. architecture is unique in how wrapped up it is in neoliberal, ego-based individualism. most of the teachers, doctors, and policy people i know could give two shits about "making a significant contribution"- they simply aim to do their work well.
i'm glad younger generations aren't falling for this attitude; hopefully we'll see it die out. funny how the oldies think the young ones are the snowflakes who need trophies and praise..
archanonymous
Aug 13, 20 6:00 pm
absolutely agree Whistler! I haven't been out of school (that) long and arch education has already changed so much! We started with 97 students in a 5-year Masters program and of those like 19 graduated. The rest failed out or were strongly encouraged to find another profession. I teach now and I can't even give a goddam "C" without getting threatening emails from some spoiled brat's parents, or questions from the administration about why students are struggling so much in my studio. Why? Because they are a fuckin ding-dong who has no business being an architect.
whistler
Aug 13, 20 6:02 pm
I'm with Frank! Although I couldn't live in any of his house's
midlander
Aug 13, 20 7:19 pm
it does seem that a lot of dissatisfaction in architecture seems to come from people who don't even like designing buildings or even understand what the role of a designer is.
square.
Aug 13, 20 7:59 pm
the irony is you don't see the connection between the idealist, entitled graduates you all complain about and the overinflated sense of importance, competition, and ego you attached to architecture studio. 19/97 graduating isn't something to be proud of, it's an embarrassment for your program. med school is much more difficult than architecture school, yet the graduation rates are much higher.
architecture isn't rocket science; maybe if you spent less time trying to be frank and more time teaching the basics, we'd have a better prepared work force.
archanonymous
Aug 13, 20 8:27 pm
If we spent less time coddling entitled kids and encouraged them to go into a profession they could hack it in, we would also have a better prepared workforce.
zonker
Aug 13, 20 4:35 pm
and in many firms, design is only done in this "gated community/ivory tower" "we're the designers and you are production caste
mirror1973
Aug 29, 20 9:36 pm
I really tried my best, for ten years, sometimes I passed but most of the times I failed, at the end the rolling clock would bite me in the ass and had to start over, after ten years I decided to quit. I know colleagues are disappointed in me, but I realized I was pushing hard for something unattainable for me. I admit, every time a coworker passes the tests I get happy for them and depressed for my own self. It was THE goal of my life and I didn’t achieve it. It has been three years since I gave up and I am still struggling with depression about it, some days are better some are not. ARE destroyed my self esteem, I hope others don’t get to live my situation.
natematt
Aug 30, 20 1:58 am
There is a habit of people in this field not being able to balance what is good for them and what they want. I applaud your ability to stop. Your colleagues shouldn't be disappointed, they should be proud of you for doing what was best for you.
I had a good friend in a similar situation, and the reality is that I could never tell if it was that she was bad at tests, unlucky, or just really didn't try hard enough at studying. I realized that it wasn't my damn business or place to judge. She was good at her job, and did what was best for her by stopping. Those are all anyone should hold you accountable to.
Janette
Sep 4, 20 11:05 pm
I quit licensure soon after being forced to transition to ARE 5.0 - NCARB made it sound like something new and beautiful. I make a good living designing residential homes in TX without a license. I am glad i quit testing when I did because looking back it was a waste of my time and happiness. My husband is an accountant and he calls NCARB a pyramid scheme. There was a recent post about NCARB's tax documents so I showed my husband. In 2017, NCARB administered approx 50,000 exams which paid for massive salaries. The CEO of NCARB makes $40k/month, and then go down to $35k/month, $25K/month, and so on. What was interesting is that the revenue NCARB makes from exams equals the salaries of NCARB staff. Is there any question why, when NCARB reduced exams by one, that the cost of exams increased? If you don't know the answer, I hope you are not performing any calculations. As another point of reference, the org that sponsors the PE exam, they spend 100% of exam revenues on exam development and implementation and pay one executive about $25k/month and that's it. NCARB spends on 1/2 of exam revenues on exam development and implementation and pays for numerous exorbitant salaries. NCARB IRS 990: https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/d...
Anyhoo, based on the $11,000,000 in revenue NCARB made in 2017 from exam attempts (passed and failed), and let's assume exams were $225 (yes i know there are now $235), there are approximately 50K NCARB exams being taken every year. What NCARB refuses to publish is, 1) how many exams per year of total exam taken are "Fails," and 2) how many licenses are being issued every year. Well, NCARB won't release the latter data because they conveniently defer to the states which are fragmented (NCARB has the data, c'mon - if they don't they are incompetent). However, they do keep data about how many exam attempts are "Fails" and they refuse to release that data to the public.
The whole reason my husband calls it a pyramid scheme is because NCARB refuses to release data about exactly how the $11,000,000 breaks down. Obviously NCARB encourages people to take more and more exams because it is in NCARB's interest to make the licensure process as difficult as possible because that = more moola. The BS though is that NCARB does not exist to protect the health and safety of the public -that is the job of state and local jurisdictions. NCARB's only interest is to keep a steady flow of revenue into NCARB's coffers to pay for the $40,000/per month salary of the CEO and the outlandish salaries of other unnecessary executive staff.
So I disagree that the essence of NCARB is killing architecture. But I do agree that the people that run NCARB are definitely suffocating the profession for their own financial gain and the states are failing licensed professionals. I can also say that I am glad I quit NCARB when I did. I only wish I had done it sooner.
midlander
Sep 4, 20 11:16 pm
i'd agree the essence of ncarb is creating an unregulated intermediary to siphon money out of a regulatory system that's of no interest to the public. good for you that you figured out you can do your work without their sanction. it's essentially a lawful cartel.
x-jla
Sep 7, 20 10:59 am
Bulgar, residential still needs to go through permitting, inspections, etc. the builders are also licensed. The safety stuff is covered, so why should an architect license be required? It’s a bit different in commercial, because you are dealing with more complex issues, but residential is pretty straightforward.
77LightTemple
Sep 5, 20 2:05 am
Maybe the AIA should investigate this matter
Janette
Sep 7, 20 6:42 pm
The fact is that in all states, you do not need a license to design residential structures that are two stories or less above a basement. If you don't know that, then read your state's practice laws. It's not a Texas thing, it a national thing. I have designed homes in CA, NV, TX, and NM. I get that license folks might be upset when they hear that (which is strange because I thought that was common knowledge), but it's a fact: you do not need to have a license to produce drawings for residential structures 2 stories or less. And with COVID and the subsequent telework across the entire country, there is going to be MUCH less need for new space, hence much less need for a license that is already not needed. And even new space, when needed, can be designed by an engineer, just tilt-up structures or factory built stuff. It may not look pretty, but what looks pretty in the US anyways? ...not much...
I would suggest that any NCARB exec or Board member must pass the NCARB exam, no matter how many years ago they got licensed. Many of them probably never took an NCARB exam and I would also guess that many of them have no formal education. In CA you can still become licensed with ZERO education. Bottom line is that an architect license is becoming more and more irrelevant and useless because it's based on principals from the 1800's. This is 2020, almost 2021. The only people who give two sh*ts about a license are other architects - it's a cult like religion or AA. Licensed architects want to recruit other people to the club to get licensed because it validates their efforts. But to people outside of the cult, well, nobody gives a sh*t. And that's where NCARB and AIA come in - they want $$, they don't care about "architecture." Their existence depends on contributions from those who buy into the cult. But the cult is dying. It's unfortunate because although NCARB is crap (NCRAP), there is value in architectural education and experience, but our value as designers has been stymied for so long by NCARB/AIA that other professions (interiors, construction mangers, engineers, planners) have stepped in to assume those roles.
It's simple supply/demand. How many buildings are going to be erected in the next decade that need an architect to build? Answer = 0. You don't need an architect to build a building. COVID has shown that telework is healthy for employers and employees and the cost of commercial real estate has plummeted. In efforts to falsely inflate the value of an architects services, NCRAP has made it ridiculously difficult to become licensed. But architects are not trained in business. Ultimately what NCRAP's efforts will prove, when only a couple hundred licensed architects exists in the US, is that architects are no more valuable than a licensed shoe-shiner. It's sad but it's too late.
Josh Mings
Sep 7, 20 7:57 pm
How many times do you have to be kicked off a forum before you get the hint, Balkins?
Chad Miller
Sep 8, 20 10:25 am
It's there to ignore you until you get banned again. How many times has Balkins been kicked off this site?
Chad Miller
Sep 8, 20 1:59 pm
You've been banned, several times. I think that is relevant to any thread you post in.
SneakyPete
Sep 8, 20 2:29 pm
I think we should have a feature installed that hides Balkins posts with a warning about questionable information, similar to Twitter.
Chad Miller
Sep 8, 20 2:32 pm
Or the admins could just kick out the latest version of Balkins.
SneakyPete
Sep 8, 20 2:38 pm
There seems to be a reluctance.
square.
Sep 8, 20 3:03 pm
when you think you're contributing something useful.. the key word is credibility, and you ain't got it.
Janette
Sep 8, 20 6:33 pm
Haha yeah I don't think anything on this site is worth arguing over. People actually get kicked off the site?!?
As far as residential structures, if you simply design according to the codes there isn't much that can go wrong - it's pretty straight-forward. Of course, there are conditions that require some brainstorming and creative thinking, especially with the higher-end homes, but it's not rocket science or brain surgery (engineering or medicine lol).
NCARB is why I chose not to get licensed because, 1) the return on time and money invested just isn't there (my research showed that, for example, a career in codes or planning can be much more lucrative than architectural practice and no license is necessary), and 2) NCARB refuses to release data that would answer my questions about the future of working in architecture, probably because the data is not favorable. Instead of going to the dentist or doctor, when is that last time you heard somebody say, "Honey, I need to go to the architect this week..." or instead of a business consulting legal, "...John/Jane, that's a great idea, but we should consult architecture before moving forward..." Nobody even likes architects except for other architects lol.
Occasionally I work with a retired architect (he's in his 70's). He has no architecture degree, never took an NCARB exam (he took the exam before NCARB replaced state exams). He tells me that back in the day, architects used to "get their hands dirty" but now it's all about art and sculpture and pretty ideas and words. I agree with him. I hated architecture school just for those reasons: there was no practicality/reality in architecture school. It was such a joke - all about pretty pictures and buildings that would never stand up in reality, much less get built.
This site is sort-of addicting! I suppose I will leave with this: for me personally, I don't understand why architects think architects and architecture is so special... it's just a job and it doesn't even pay all that well. If you're an artist go be an artist but spare me all the "Well then you don't have passion..." or "...it's an art form..." Puh-lease! But seriously, can anybody explain why architects feel the need to inflate architecture into some philosophical and academic "thing" when it is just providing instructions on how to put something together?
x-jla
Sep 8, 20 6:43 pm
Agree and disagree. It’s like being a chef, some freeze a pea in liquid nitrogen, put it on a lamb testicle, and sell it for 200$ a plate...others cook food that most people want to eat, and call it a day. There is a place for everything, and it’s stupid that ncarb makes someone who designs houses jump through the same hoops as someone who designs skyscrapers.
Chad Miller
Sep 8, 20 7:21 pm
So you chose not to become licensed because NCARB made it too difficult?
archanonymous
Sep 8, 20 8:42 pm
Just providing instructions on how to put something together... and vision of what that something is. Oh and please translate the current modes of production, economic efficiencies, and cultural zeitgeist into something both beautiful and build-able. Oh, also make sure the thing you design is safe and no one dies in a fire. Oh yeah, almost forgot, can you make it accessible to the differently-abled? Remember also we have a maximum budget. And it can't just be all these things, it has to comply with the adopted legislation (sometimes thousands of pages long) codifying these things.
It's no wonder you didn't become an architect...
awaiting_deletion
Sep 8, 20 9:04 pm
I often wonder who makes all these one hit wonders that get the regular's all worked up here at archinect.
Chad Miller
Sep 9, 20 1:17 pm
True - but it doesn't mean you shouldn't. Now go get banned again
.
Chad Miller
Sep 9, 20 5:11 pm
Blah, blah, blah. I'm not reading that. You've been banned multiple times for sexist and racist posts. Take the hint and leave. You're not welcome here.
ivanmillya
Aug 22, 22 8:35 pm
Rick: "Small residential projects, the typical stuff is going to treat you like a Chinese sweat shop making you work 80-100 hours a week for peanuts and nickels"
Nope. I work 55 hours a week (because we're inundated with projects), and we make out just fine as a firm with our residential work.
"With residential projects, you are competing with contractors providing the "same" (from the perspective of the client) services you are offering "on paper""
Try again. Our clients come to us because, as architects, we're educated and trained to understand not only aesthetic design, but also budget and time management, and coordination between the G.C., our consulting engineers (of which there are many here in Florida), the various trades, and the whims of the Owner. We're providing services the G.C. could never achieve on their own, and it's in large part due to the training and education we do in our specific profession as architects.
Janette
Sep 9, 20 5:57 pm
Well, Bulgar and RCZ, you are both incorrect: I make more money than most senior registered architects in TX and my business is built entirely on referrals that span multiple states. Unless you're talking about massive multifamily residential, an architect isn't necessary. I see why this might upset you because it's work that you won't get (for the same work, I can charge lower fees which further expands my client base). But most of an architects work is commercial, most commercial is crap, and much commercial doesn't need an architect (an engineer can substitute for an architect). And buildings are so complex now that consultants do all the technical work because the architect does not have the necessary level of technical expertise.
Also, technology and building codes are going in the direction of standardization. ADU's are in the codes now, factory built and modular housing is becoming more mainstream. A mid-rise residential tower was recently built in Dallas and it was entirely factory built/modular. Not sure if an architect was involved, but since each dwelling unit was designed/constructed individually in a factory, not sure an architect was required. Just needed an engineer to design the connection between the units and a construction manager to oversee the assembly once the units arrived to the site. This technology is already becoming part of large commercial projects, too.
And to some of the nasty posts...no need to be nasty or make this personal - these are just opinions and observations. I chose not to become licensed and I think there should be more of a discussion why people choose this and why people leave practice. On the third year of my B. Arch, I realized architecture school was BS but I was going to finish what I started. After finishing my B. Arch, I was recruited by an international firm where I completed my IDP. I saw the long hours and grueling work that the registered architects put in, they made an architect salary, and architects just don't make that much money. The principals made a lot of money but they were very old. I don't want to work into my 70's. So I put the license behind me and became a "Residential Designer" and went into business for myself. But to get back to the original post (no need to be nasty and make this personal), the "architect" is becoming irrelevant, extinct, and what I think the original poster was referring to is that the NCRAP/NAAB/AIA complex is doing nothing to fix it. Instead, they perpetuate the same archaic ideas about architectural practice which is why the architect is becoming extinct. The original posts asks, what does an architect do that can't be done by somebody else... this is why the architect is becoming extinct because the answer it "not much..." Someday, maybe I will need a registered architect and I will hire you, how's that? You can design the bathrooms ;-)
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 6:22 pm
I did my contractors license instead...design-build is so much more lucrative.
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 7:20 pm
“guess people get what they pay for in terms of design when they hire a contractor.” I have an m-arch and I’m a very good designer. I also know how to build things. You jelly?
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 7:30 pm
“All a contractor/builder cares about is two things: executing a design per plan that is on time and on budget.” Tell that to my stone fabricator lolololol.
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 7:36 pm
“No, because if your work is a McMansion, your comment about being a “good designer” cancels itself out.“ - what makes you think I do McMansions? I don’t even do houses, I do landscapes...and my ceilings are always nicer than yours.
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 7:40 pm
BB, you missed my joke...my ceilings are the sky...get it. Never mind
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 9:09 pm
“his ability” “his design training”...very sexist
x-jla
Sep 9, 20 9:10 pm
In a time where half of academia is female, at least take a second to write “he/her”. As a professional you can do better to lift up our sisters.
natematt
Sep 10, 20 2:11 pm
"A mid-rise residential tower was recently built in Dallas and it was entirely factory built/modular. Not sure if an architect was involved, but since each dwelling unit was designed/constructed individually in a factory, not sure an architect was required."
natematt
Sep 10, 20 2:31 pm
I presume by "was built" this implies you were not involved.
My office has worked on several modular projects recently, and it has required every bit as much attention from the architect. It's just a construction type, it still needs design and coordination from someone, IE an architect. Sure, the architect could be inside the manufacturer or contractor team, but people are still there doing architecture. (it's probably a distinct separate firm though)
Janette
Sep 9, 20 9:33 pm
...my point is that one does not need a license to make a nice living designing buildings. You might call them McMansions, I call it McMoney, setting my own McSchedule, and watching my McBankAccount McGrow. By the way, the state of TX adopts building codes which then apply to cities and counties (not just cities). Am I the only woman on this thread?
Buildings are art and science, but architects don't do the science because they lack the expertise. So that leaves art. And the budgets for most commercial buildings don't have room for artsy-fartsy crap. In fact, most buildings are not art at all - they are just boxes that sort-of protect us from the elements. So where does that leave architects?
So RCZ, no need for foul language. The reason I stopped pursuing the license, even though I finished my IDP hours, is a few things. One: pursuing the license didn't align with my values, two: I realized that I don't need a license to make money and 3: because my time/money was better spent elsewhere (relationship, starting my own business instead of making some old fat guys rich). Also, all the NCRAP rules, the rule changes that occurred while I was doing this... When I first started out, you couldn't start taking your exams until you completed your degree AND IDP hours. Now you can become licensed by the time you graduate! What does that say about a license (answer: it's not that valuable - I wouldn't hire somebody right our of school and expect them to perform duties of a registered architect). The only reason NCRAP exists is to fund the $40,000/month salaries the execs provide to themselves. Add to that the education that I knew didn't prepare me for actual practice (and I went to Rice but all NAAB programs are basically the same).
Stop drinking the kool-aid while you are still young: architecture is not special, there's nothing more special about architecture than there is about septic tank cleaning. Buildings are boxes with little tubes and wires in the walls, and they keep some elements outside. Some boxes are big, some boxes are small. The rest is academic fluff; just pretty words and pictures. If, for a moment, the practice of architecture was going to be re-thought and the license would be...ummmm...not some unnecessary fossil/artifact, I would consider starting my exams again. I would love to go into architectural research or specialize in environmental behavior, but that's not how the system is set up. Currently, the NCRAP/NAAB/AIA system is set up so that architecture is was it was 100 years ago. By the way, these are my opinions - no need for the foul language or getting upset.
archanonymous
Sep 9, 20 9:39 pm
Is there not a McForum where you can take your McMoney and talk your McShit while beauty, art and culture in the mother of all arts dies over here with the real architects?
Non Sequitur
Sep 9, 20 9:44 pm
excuses are easy. sorry, excuses are Mceasy.
Janette
Sep 9, 20 9:56 pm
If you want an echo chamber of your own opinion, a discussion forum isn't the best place to be. Do you have any critical thought/ideas to add?
x-jla
Sep 10, 20 11:23 am
Yeah, but can a kangaroo design a house in Oregon without a boxing license or does they has to be a human?
natematt
Sep 10, 20 1:58 pm
"Buildings are art and science, but architects don't do the science because they lack the expertise"
Really? God must be nice to just get paid to draw pretty pictures of buildings that other people do all the work to actually get built indicated by the fact that you have to do no details, coordination, construction administration, and have the smallest sheet set.... oh wait.
Chad Miller
Sep 10, 20 10:16 am
Janette - you could simply post up some examples of your work and how much you make a year to show how successful and talented you are.
Jay1122
Sep 10, 20 11:50 am
Ha, so funny seeing so many egotistic "architects" or "architect wannabe" getting enraged by Janette. From the posts above, seems like Janette is doing those boring 2x4 vinyl houses in Texas that does not require licenses to stamp drawing. It is definitely good money, if you utilize your drawing library and do repeat build. To me, it is not architectural success, more of business success, architecture is just the medium in this case, not much different from selling cars. Hard to judge because it is all about ones value. One could be a licensed architect working in firms like KPF 60 HR/week doing skyscraper tower stair details making 65K.
Janette
Sep 10, 20 12:13 pm
6 digits, site-built homes.
Jay1122
Sep 10, 20 12:34 pm
Hey, 6 digits can be 100,000 to 999,999. There is a huge difference. 100K is not bad but meh still achievable with salary. 200k-300k, now we are talking sweet stuff.
Janette
Sep 10, 20 12:56 pm
I have done some factory-built homes; not double-wide mobile homes, for example check out Blu Homes. I want to do more of these. The level of detail and accuracy one can achieve with factory-built versus site-built is incredible. My hubby and I live in a factory-built and nobody can even tell. Anyways, I think I am done here... there isn't much "discussion" on this forum, it's seems like it's about a bunch of guys saying the same thing over and over to inflate their ego... licensed folks have a lot of power - change the system! Call out your state boards and NCRAP.
Chad Miller
Sep 10, 20 1:06 pm
Janette - seriously, post up some of your work and how much you make - it will shut up the haters. I know you said six figures but as Jay said - that's a huge range. Also how many hours a year do you work?
Jay1122
Sep 10, 20 1:16 pm
Pre-fab house and site built are the same thing. Factory has more control offering higher consistency and quality. The cost is the same though, that is why prefab never took off in the market. Low end residential house is not really a market for architect.It is the same blue print used repeatedly for mass produced product. Only 2% residential project involves architect, mostly high end custom stuff. If one architect touches those vinyl house, the person definitely failed the business in public, have to retreat to the cheap markets. Public work like education is way more lucrative in terms of smash and grab projects.1st firm i worked out of school loves those low end smash and grab projects, often does not want to actively pursue large projects. Did a Roof replacement job in two weeks from survey to CD set out to bid. I think the fee was around 20K for that. 2 Weeks of intern survey & drafting with few hours supervisor review for $20K. Of course often time we troll around and drag the time longer. Imagine you work 2 weeks and get paid 20K, man that is awesome, of course there are some overheads, but how much can that be. Now remember, you need license to sign and seal those drawings for public jobs. That is why i am trying to get it, studying for test now. Oh sht, have i let the secrets out.
SneakyPete
Sep 10, 20 4:25 pm
"anti-hetereosexuality comments by several forum regulars and their demands for heterosexual males to change their sexual orientation"
Utter fantasy. Never happened. You have, however, made comments that are either outright racist or outright homophobic or are posted due to such ignorance as to make no difference. I would post links but they have been purged. You want to be treated like an adult, learn to act like one and don't resort to slurs.
awaiting_deletion
Sep 11, 20 9:19 pm
rick's actually a genius. spams anything with regard to the profession right into oblivion.
gibbost
Apr 27, 21 3:57 pm
The time for loathing NCARB is after you pass your tests and realize that you have to keep cutting checks each year in their 'pay-to-play' scheme for reciprocity.
Buck up, study the material and pass the tests. It's a battle of wills, not of knowledge. Something tells me your attitude will shift once you're a member of the club. You tend to get a little territorial about it after you're on the other side.
RJ87
Apr 27, 21 4:17 pm
I try to remind myself not to be as territorial but it never works. One of the reasons I pushed early for my license was because it bothered me that I couldn't call myself an Architect. Every time I see someone calling themselves one when they're not licensed I involuntarily twitch even though I tell myself it doesn't affect me one way or another. Either you can sign drawings or you can't, the rest is just semantics.
I think when you're on the unlicensed side of the gate it's natural to be adversarial to the system, I know I repeatedly cursed about the exams. But it was more of a "It's me vs these exams" kind of way not a "I don't like these so they shouldn't be here" kind of way.
Chad Miller
Apr 27, 21 6:15 pm
It's not that bad.
Non Sequitur
Apr 27, 21 6:20 pm
There was a rant here an hour or so ago that dragged this horse back into the beating circle. That user used their real name so probably deleted their account to save themselves some embarrassent.
RJ87
Apr 28, 21 10:11 am
Wait, your real name isn't Non Sequitur?!?
Chad Miller
Apr 28, 21 10:25 am
Yours isn't RJ87?! I'm disappointed.
tduds
Apr 28, 21 11:26 am
What a thread.
Everyday Architect
Apr 28, 21 11:44 am
I'd forgotten about the apple metaphor
joseffischer
Apr 28, 21 1:55 pm
Your response was beautiful
tduds
Apr 28, 21 2:41 pm
Wow, yeah. That's art EA.
Everyday Architect
Apr 28, 21 2:54 pm
Thanks. Every once in a while I have a good day. I think Rick's response of just "ok..." is what seals it.
Non Sequitur
Apr 29, 21 6:07 pm
I'm surprised the internet as a whole was permitted to continue it's existence following that apple example.
Peter Normand
Apr 29, 21 5:56 pm
The Purpose for NCARB and the exams is to set a Minimum Bar for competency to be an architect. This is just how it is, we don't give out drivers licences to folks who can't pass the exam or have physical impairments that would make them an unsafe driver nor do we grant architect's licences or registration to people who can not pass the exams. Many folks have long successful careers and never get a licence. The exams in conjunction with an internship with a diverse range of experiences is the best option we have to figure out who has the minimum qualifications to be an architect. This is not about keeping folks out of a profession but about protecting the public from incompetence and swindlers who would otherwise pose as a competent professional when they are not.
Over and OUT
Peter N
square.
May 20, 21 3:29 pm
it really isn't though- it's an economic tool to control the number of licensed professionals. and it's a relatively new one at that. codes and zoning do far more to keep people safe than credentials.. as you said, there are plenty of successful individuals participating in architecture, safely, without licenses.
Testing is not a quantifier of knowledge for many reasons. Tests for licenses do not set a bar for competencies because most tests are based on academia and not practicum.Ironically the individuals who build these exams do not live in practicum but rather have academic presence and notoriety and to quote "cannot make it in the real world". Do we "pour or place concrete" the answer to an academic in the profession will tell you "place" the practicum will tell you "pour"...the tests are written for people 3 years out of school...need I say more?
b3tadine[sutures]
Nov 16, 23 6:22 pm
This is not true. Have you ever been to one of the NCARB volunteering opportunities to help write testing?
kimberlyp
May 19, 21 10:55 pm
well the DMV is issuing drivers license now to students who can easily pass an online, unobserved exam while easily cheating—- yes —-Covid changed things. So yes, licenses are now easily given out.
RJ87
May 20, 21 4:48 pm
I'm waiting on the day they start making people 75+ retake the exam every few years.
Meatball2000
Apr 18, 22 5:17 pm
NCARB sucks, exam sucks, it's not okay to be underpaid with student loan AND prepare for six exams, but there are plenty of people that pass the exams, get licensed and not getting paid that reflecting their efforts, but still okay with their profession, or like, or heck, love the profession.
But seriously, if life is too hard on you, if one way is not working or the future looks grey, go switch to another one.
If you decided to stay on, I hope you find your support system, a good friend who knows the pain, or a good therapist.
It's been a while since your original post, but I hope you didn't waste your life debating the profession on the internet.
Volunteer
Apr 19, 22 7:43 am
The accredited architectural schools should teach the essentials required to pass the test with ease. The schools should not 'teach the tests' but make sure all the salient points are covered and understood by everyone graduating. Five years of schooling with As and Bs and the students repeatedly fail the tests? No. Something is badly wrong.
monosierra
Apr 19, 22 9:26 am
They should, but the skilled professionals on some faculties are also outnumbered by the de facto artists and PhDs more interested in that one book they read on object oriented ontology than in the art and science of building. Their work focuses on ... themselves - studying the study of architecture rather than making architecture.
RJ87
Apr 19, 22 9:42 am
I'm of the opinion that construction methods & design studios should hold equal weight in school.
Another glaring difference with architecture schools is that it's objectively hard to "fail". Because design studios are so subjective, as long as you show up and produce something you'll pass. As a result you end up with a lot of folks with an undergraduate (or even graduate) degree that just kind of floated through school. In other professional degrees, there's usually a number of exams along the way that ensure a higher minimum competency of graduates.
RJ87
Apr 19, 22 9:50 am
Unless they make the exams easier (which I would surely hope they don't), I don't see pass rates improving significantly as long as the profession doesn't require licensure to participate in the majority of tasks related to architecture. As long as they can put graduates into the profession, schools won't particularly care if you get licensed or not so they won't focus on preparing you for the exams. Compare it with doctors, nurses, lawyers, even hairdressers that can't fully operate within the profession without a license.
BluecornGroup
Apr 20, 22 9:44 pm
you are 100% correct - just talked to my Albuquerque architect and he had hired a graduate M.Arch. because he saw potential in him - he wanted him to detail a backsplash and toe kickspace - he didn't know what these were - the architect had to take him to the breakroom to point these out - true story from last week ...
Non Sequitur
Apr 20, 22 9:53 pm
Good TED talk.
Chad Miller
Apr 20, 22 10:16 pm
I'll take things that didn't happen for $100 Alex.
I say, take the NCARB, and turn it into an "Architectural Labor Union", to protect its workers from the exploitation of its employers, and their bad business I practice models.
Well I though once I get my 4 year Bachelors Degree in Architecture, I would then become an Architect. Although, when I was working in Architecture after some 15 years, and started on the drawing board, and now I have around 10 years on auto-cad, I would then have some type of competition and job stability. What I find now is unemployment since I'm not licensed. I'm looking, but no one will hire me again since 2017.
I blame it on Architecture itself, and the companies who profiteer on this type of business model. Its a non-humanist approach to employees or people. I've been here in Miami Fl. all of my life, and cannot find work! They wanted me to attend FAU to complete the fifth year in Ft. Lauderdale. I'm blindly suppose to travel that far away for a so called one more year professional degree and then jump through a bunch more hoops as If I'm just beginning?
Makes no sense what so ever when I cannot even hold a job long-term in Architecture for no longer than 4 years (manual Drafting) in all my 15 years. Never fails, They always let me go because of a lack of work. Then, I will collect unemployment (business owners hate), and I am unemployed for at least two more years, but now its been 5 years.
No thanks, apparently this is what my future will be like as an Architect, is to hire and fire everyone after a year, or two, when the work is completed. Is this called competition or exploitation? If your very young, and just starting in architecture, get out while you still can.
Be thankful that you have the knowledge in architecture, and that the Architects are using you to finish what they don't have the ability to do themselves. To show you their thanks, they will chuck you out like an old dish rag. Again, I say, take the NCARB, and turn it onto an Architectural Labor Union, to protect its workers from its employers!
bennyc
Aug 20, 22 8:41 pm
This is all bullcrap. Try the real world and practice on your own, have real clients, and then you will realize organizations like ncarb and aia are the reason you get paid, or have any say in the building process. If there was no organization, no laws, no standards, anyone with ability to draft would be able to work on designing a building.
Get over youself, be a man and pass the exam, if you cant then you arent worthy, go into the bitching business.
b3tadine[sutures]
Aug 21, 22 8:15 am
Um. No.
SneakyPete
Aug 21, 22 10:27 am
Toxic masculinity, is that you?
Non Sequitur
Aug 21, 22 12:26 pm
What a fucking wanker.
x-jla
Aug 21, 22 2:57 pm
“Anyone with the ability” what a tragedy that would be. Image people with the ability to do something doing that thing without first having to succumb to a Kafka bukaki fest.
SneakyPete
Aug 21, 22 5:39 pm
While I think your choice of words is gross, this may be one small area where you and I align.
b3tadine[sutures]
Aug 21, 22 9:13 pm
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
SneakyPete
Aug 21, 22 10:23 pm
You'd like the stuff I've worked on. I'm not interested in sharing, though. I don't need validation.
SneakyPete
Aug 21, 22 10:24 pm
In case you missed it red, jla was being sarcastic.
Chad Miller
Aug 22, 22 1:12 pm
RedRoverArchitect - start a thread to share work. The first post can be some of your work. I'll wait.
Non Sequitur
Aug 22, 22 1:44 pm
You're not impressing anyone with your empty flex there, RedRover.
Chad Miller
Aug 22, 22 2:09 pm
RedRoverArchitect - I'm being serious. This isn't meant as an insult or diss. Post up your work.
On a side note, why did you delete your post RRA?
Non Sequitur
Aug 22, 22 2:21 pm
^probably because it was an attempt to doxx. Not sure why my comment is hidden tho. Boo urns.
Chad Miller
Aug 22, 22 4:03 pm
That's a funny way of trying that. Why would anyone try to doxx anyone? Seems like a waste of time.
I can still see you comment NS. I just have to click 'view comment'.
Everyday Architect
Aug 22, 22 6:10 pm
Seems like they weren't happy with the result based on the thumbs down you both have.
What an interesting username! I wonder what it means? /s
Non Sequitur
Aug 22, 22 6:12 pm
Yep. I guess RRA is just another childish wanker. Nothing of worth was lost today.
Everyday Architect
Aug 22, 22 6:12 pm
Welp, thumbs down are gone. Guess the BGH got involved
Chad Miller
Aug 22, 22 6:19 pm
EA - it sounds like you know who RRA was / is. ;)
Non Sequitur
Aug 22, 22 8:14 pm
Not the brightest, are you.
Everyday Architect
Aug 23, 22 3:34 pm
No idea who they are ... don't really care. The thumbs down weren't from anyone under a real name unless their parents had some type of axe to grind against archinect when they decided on their legal name.
derrickpayne
Nov 16, 23 4:55 pm
Good lord ..lol..
Everyday Architect
Aug 22, 22 12:29 pm
I see we've come almost full circle on Rick's contributions to this thread. We've got him posting under his rcz1001 alias as well as now his real name. Next step to finish this out is for him to get all his comments nuked and come back with a different account and post some more.
I still stand by my apple metaphor. Rick, have you sold any "apples" in Sweden recently ... or at all?
Chad Miller
Aug 22, 22 6:46 pm
I don't think the profession is f$*&ed. I don't think the licensing process is f*#@ed. Are there improvements that can be made - sure. Are improvements being made - sure. Will the profession or the licensing process be perfect - never.
ivanmillya
Aug 22, 22 6:54 pm
I think the general direction of the profession is actually heading in a good direction (albeit slowly). In stark contrast to many other professions, it seems like the older architects in the industry genuinely want the younger generation to be able to do better for themselves and the world than they could.
By contrast, it seems that a lot of the people complaining about the nebulous "profession of architecture" never really jumped fully in anyway (those who gave up on licensure, or who fell through the cracks and jumped to another profession altogether). All this is just my own experiences, so yada yada grain of salt.
b3tadine[sutures]
Aug 22, 22 8:31 pm
I'm always astonished how little, people know what NCARB does, who is responsible for establishing the organization, and who funds it.
Everyday Architect
Aug 23, 22 3:33 pm
I'm assuming Chad's comment was to someone else who has since had their comment(s) removed from the thread. Otherwise, I don't know why Chad is responding the way he is.
Chad Miller
Aug 23, 22 4:30 pm
You would be correct EA. My response was to a comment from Rick that has been removed.
Having just completed a coast to coast bicycle ride I will also pass along words of wisdom from my daughter's 5th grade class, "just keep pedaling"
pandahut
Nov 12, 22 5:56 pm
Beautiful. Found your blog and going to check it out now. Recently watched a few vids of this ride. How are you feeling post ride? I hope it was an amazing time. Have you watched TWO YEARS ON A BIKE on youtube by Martjin D.? Highly recommend....
go do it
Nov 12, 22 7:43 pm
pandahut,
I finished the ride on Oct. 28 and I am feeling great, thanks.
And yes it was an amazingly beautiful personal experience and I highly recommend this for everyone that can find the time. I still need to do some sort of an epilogue for the journal but the journal was a great way to help remember things.
I will watch TWO YEARS ON A BIKE on your recommendation.
go do it
Nov 24, 22 2:15 pm
I watched 2 years and it is a very good production. It is interesting to me that he needed the desert to formulate his thoughts and to recalibrate because that is what I felt in the desert. The solitude forces one to be introspective. Most of the time when I think back I place myself i
n the desert. Alone.
smaarch
Nov 17, 23 3:42 am
For F sakes that's a really long way of saying we are being screwed.
I am taking my belongings and going home. I have taken PPD and PDD each 3 times now and failed each time. Three times is the limit I set for myself so I am done with this racket. I have passed all content areas on PPD and PDD, but they jump around like a shell game. The fact that I can pass a content area with a score of 1, then receive a score of 4 in the same content area on a different attempt, says to me that these exams don't accurately/consistently measure input. Passing PDD/PPD is more like pulling a slot machine lever and hoping for all cherries on the same line: it's not about passing 1 exam, it's about passing 5 exams at once.
With planners, engineers, code professionals, attorneys, project managers, construction managers, fire/life safety professionals, architectural designers, interior designers, etc, I am not sure why architects exist at all. The profession in its current form is obsolete, decision-makers (AIA/NCARB/NAAB) stifle competition, and thus stifle innovation. The discipline could learn from the engineering model: have one general exam and optional speciality exams such as: envelope, sustainability, accessibility, thermal, research. But this will never happen because it would expose the giant fissure in the discipline: there is nothing an architect does that can't be done by somebody else. Thus the discipline holds on to this archaic model because to change would mean acknowledgment of the fissure. Architecture education is based on an 18-century model and licensure is based on a 19th-century model of the architect as an Howard Rourke ideal. Current architecture discipline is antiquated like a Victorian house: it’s pretty to look at but it’s not applicable to life today because it’s based on obsolete principles. Licensure can be likened to Blockbuster Video in our Netflix economy: it's out of touch with modern times. Not only are the exams like using MS-DOS, but the questions have nothing to do with practice.
I don’t know if my thoughts will help anybody but I know many test takers are struggling like I was. Here is how I arrived at this decision to quit: a license is nothing more than a rented piece of paper from your state and you (I) do not need a piece of paper to do what you want (unless you want to stamp a drawing, and I could not care less about that). But if you want to do design, you do not need a license. For me, it wasn't just the cash up-front, but it’s the time spent studying, the stress, the opportunity costs, the constant gray cloud following me around: study, study, study, gotta pass, gotta pass, my future depends on it. If I wasn't studying, I couldn't enjoy whatever else I was doing. The reality is that, “No," my future does not depend on a license. In fact, a license might be a hindrance and prevent me from seeing/seeking other opportunities. A license might pigeon-hole me.
It might be a bit more pricey, but if you are on the fence about licensure, consider getting another degree - at least it’s not rented; you own it for life. I earned an MPA in 2.5 years at night for about $17k from a state U and it was LESS stressful than attempting licensure! If you can get through a B. Arch, you can easily do a Master's in another field. My MPA has increased my earning potential much more than a license would have and it has widened my marketability. I have parlayed into code development which has no visible ceiling that I can see, and there are no arbitrary or inflated license/cert/registration requirements. I wanted the license to validate my efforts, but I realized that validation is not a good reason for becoming licensed. And as somebody on Architect has said: architecture just isn’t important enough to get stressed about. I will say it again: architecture just isn't that important. In fact, some states are attempting to deregulate architecture to increase competition and innovation, and to break up the monopoly that a handful of organizations have on the discipline (AIA/NCARB/NAAB). I support this. Competition breeds innovation and architecture is in dire need of innovation. Can you imagine if medical professionals resisted innovation to the point that in 2020, the practice of medicine was the same as it was in 1920? I think architecture is the only discipline that has done this and consequently, architects are not relevant - they are seen as a necessary burden, as something to be haggled with and swept aside.
If you are struggling, wondering if it's worth it, or simply getting tired of paying $$ to be on the hamster wheel, my advice: set a limit for yourself and if you are not licensed by that time, walk away and don't look back because ARE 5.0 is designed for people to fail - it's not you, you are not stupid; ARE is a money-making racket. How do you think the executive quarter-million dollar salaries at NCARB are funded? Every minute (year) spent on this process is time NOT spent doing something else that may pay off more like a better job, a different career path, another certification, another degree, time with family, learning piano, your happiness, etc... Architecture just isn't that important, certainly not as important as other architects would have people believe. Understanding this is especially important for those of you who are in your early 30's or younger... I am almost 40 and I wish that I had cut the cord 8 years ago. I am grateful for my Master's degree and subsequent opportunities, but the time and $$ I have applied toward the licensure process will never be returned to me and looking back, it was a total waste. The things I could have done instead would have brought me much more joy. I wish I had listened less to architects: architects spent their youth, money, and career on the BS process so you doing the same thing validates their loss. It's perpetual. Break the cycle.
You're right, architects and architecture are no-where near as important as we were told to believe we were. Now... if only the length/cost of education were reduced to reflect this, then we'd have far fewer disgruntled people who otherwise might have done just fine. Just don't tell that to those $100K in debt design school graduates. They are equal, nay, better than doctors and lawyers because studio is sooooo fucking demanding.
It's worth noting that this is mostly an american problem. Plenty of other countries have modernized the licensing process AND subsidize post-secondary education. M'erica!
can you point to any problems with the profession? we've seen your opinion, quite often, that education is the problem because it sets overinflated standards and produces "underdeveloped" graduates (to which i somewhat agree and disagree). any critiques on where we spend the bulk of our time in this discipline?
genuine question.
Appreciate the genuine question and agree with your summary. My pov here is that prof-practice needs to be treated as more important than studio (because it is)... and should be a perpetual course (like most graduate level thesis projects) that spans the entirety of the M.arch instead of one or two courses that can be glazed over near the end of your degree. I just can't take anyone seriously when they claim their arch education is hard because they spent 80hrs per week on studio work. Studio is the easy stuff. Construction and prof-prac is the hard stuff.
to be fair, you probably thought it was hard when you were doing it. i only push back because i think you tend to present things from a present-dominant narrative, which devalues the difficulty of architecture school at times. just because we're professional architects in this moment doesn't mean our experience is more real or valuable than a current students. i distinctly remember that architecture school was the hardest thing i had ever done while i was doing it, and honestly i think my job is a lot easier in many ways. the mental fortitude required to get through school is pretty demanding, and anyone who can do it should be commended.
that being said, i tend to agree.. education should probably more closely mirror where the profession is. my problem is i don't like where the profession is, and i worry it's only getting worse with more and more consultants, technology, software, etc to manage, not to mention any of the issues relating to money. in other words i think architecture is wrapped up in some pretty big systemic forces that we can't affect, and i'm not sure it's a grind i can keep at.
I don't intend to state that studio is not challenging. I was that night owl student constantly in studio t'il 3-5am (hand drawings and wood models... so, there was a fair amount of labour involved) but I also worked in an office between my studio and other courses so I had a decent understanding of the difference between school and work. I just don't agree that the focus of school should be on design studio. Encourage creative &critical problem solving by all means, but pump out grads that know a thing or two about the built-world instead of indebted and disgruntled idealists.
hey now- i'm an indebted, disgruntled realist
Studio: getting a B was easy, getting an A was hard. You really had to not try AND ignore/fight whatever your professor said to get a C. I never got a studio A during a semester that my side work picked up. I had a professor chat with me for a long time about some projects that most likely were "A" material on how I wasn't choosing my priorities correctly... it was a competition semester and I got an honorable mention and my B. I think back on that now and then and remind myself he was right, I worried way too much about studio. Glad the sidework taught me construction and kept my bills low.
yes, i guess another way of summarizing it for me: i think the design-focused curriculum used to be appropriate preparation for a career in architecture (major asterisk here as the neo-liberal cult of personality has been a terrible influence on this since the 80s), but that's no longer the case, which makes me sad. i can see how those interested by the more technical side of the profession are content with the work but not the education.
I've had discussions with a former professor regarding the courses that have been the most helpful in actual practice. Without hesitation I told him that pro practice and materials and methods of construction were the most helpful. Other lecture courses were also near the top (they were also quite helpful for ARE preparation). Studios were formative, but not to the extent that schools and students prioritize them. This professor had been wondering if we shouldn't be getting rid of a few studio courses and filling in with other courses more directly relatable to practice. I would have loved to have more pro practice curriculum with a professor that actually enjoyed teaching it.
BTW, courses in software (AutoCAD and 3DS Max) have been the least helpful in my career. Caveat: I was fairly fluent in ACAD from a computer-aided drafting class in high school, otherwise it would have been more helpful.
I think a flaw in your argument NS is the emphasis on design... That is the school and educators. But if you look at the NAAB accreditation requirements, AXP requirements and ARE test stuff all tracked by NCARB... design IS NOT a big part or emphasis; it is the prof-practice stuff. So we need to beat on the colleges that make studio the primary focus.
Mighty, that’s right, but how many people who come here to complain claim they need more money because prof practice courses were so demanding? Anyways, we have the same accreditation reqs up here and our exams have maybe a dozen design questions (out of 400ish).
100k debt? I know a lot of peeps from schools like Sci-Arc (NOT Ivy League) that have 300k debt. Idiots.
^F
"that being said, i tend to agree.. education should probably more closely mirror where the profession is."
square—
FFS didn't we just have a discussion in another thread where after I complained that architecture schools are producing too many designers and not enough individuals with practical skills that are more aligned with what the profession needs to innovate an be more relevant... then you said that you question whether licensing should exist to begin with? What's with the sudden change of heart?
Your opinion is representative of your own experience. I would agree with NS about the cost of education, and with you about some of your points, particularly on validation. However, while I think everyone hates it, for many the testing isn't that big of an impact on their life.
People have different ways of thinking, and the nature of testing to evaluate your ability as an architect is pretty lame.
AIA,architecture schools and NCARB have refused to change with the times.The writing is on the wall;Technology will change the role of architects and developers will have the last laugh.Allowing AIA members to determine who gets licensed through internships has led to a profession that does not reflect the underlying demographics of society and therefore contributed to social ills instead of being the custodian of social solutions.
The process sucks, and I'm sure it locks out as many potentially great architects as it allows in extremely incompetent architects. I'd love to see some major overhaul of the licensing process.
That said I think architects are still very much a necessary profession and some form of accreditation is also necessary to ensure quality in that profession. I'm not sure what an ideal would look like, but probably a lot different from what we currently have.
Just one specific bone to pick: "there is nothing an architect does that can't be done by somebody else." Strong disagree there. I view my job as similar to an orchestra conductor / composer. I may not be able to play a violin nearly as well as the first violin player, but I know more about the trombone than that violin player ever will (and vice versa). My job is to understand just enough about each to get them to play in harmony. That's valuable.
excellent analogy
Great Analogy. One that stuck with me was told to me by a "starchitect" in my earlier years of school....... 'Engineers/specialists know everything about one thing, and Architects know a little about a lot of things'. We are one of the last good generalist professions, and in terms of design/construction can "see the forest for the trees" when others cant.
I had an Environmental Controls (HVAC, lighting, etc) prof in grad school who perfectly summed up how I approach the profession: "I'm not here to teach you how to do this, I'm here to teach you enough to know when your consultants are lying to you."
in another words, a master of none!
See David Epstein
https://youtu.be/ER2R-F68L0c
Sign up for the ARE Facebook group on Facebook. They have tons of good resources and have a really solid community with people who are going through the same pain as you. Just do a search in that group and you will find amazing support and help from posts. Don't give up!! You are so close! Good luck.
Yeah, I have read the responses and sifted through the emotional stuff (Non Sequiter, don't you have architecture to practice versus empty opinions to offer?). Nobody has clarified what architects do that isn't offered by others... it's the same empty argument about health and safety which is what the gov't uses when there is no other argument to support a gov't program. The failure here is to demonstrate what architects do that cannot be done by others. Architects are NOT equal to doctors or engineers. By all means, provide inarguable, substantive evidence that architects do something that is not done by another discipline and I swear I will make your night worth while if you are in N CA. But you cannot. Architects are now pathetic generalists and everybody else that is not licensed is making the money that architects should be making. But architects gave away the money decades ago because it was more important to look glamorous than it was to get fingers dirty. Northern Cali, anyone?
Unfortunately for you, I am correct with my “empty opinions”.
" Imagine some jackass building an ammonium nitrate facility just outside city limits where the city has no jurisdiction in a county where there is no adopted code by the county. Imagine if it was negligently designed and built. It can be a serious disaster." It did happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fertilizer_Company_explosion
Yeah, I have read the responses and sifted through the emotional stuff ... Nobody has clarified what architects do that isn't offered by others...
I don't think you did because I did.
I mean.... I can give you an answer that is 100% accurate, and you'll owe me that north cal dream night... but it will be a dick answer... if you really want it, just ask....
So... in place of that. Lets flip the question. Do you think that buildings can be built with entirely specialist teams? Or do you just think that other people can take the place of the generalist architect?
If it's the latter, then aren't you just replacing the architect with... the architect by another name?
If it's the former... well I can't see how anyone who's ever worked with consultants would envision that going well... It would be funny...
this person has clearly not reviewed shop drawings and dealt with the growth of "by others" in our field. My job is daily about getting the "experts" in the room together and asking "who's supposed to know how your part fits to yours" and both of them shrugging. Then I have to let them know how it's going to happen.
@joseffischer that's the part I hate the most in architectural practice... telling people how to do their jobs (properly). I once worked with a global engineering consulting firm that the entire team (Strct,MEP, facade...etc ) never communicate internally before turning up to the meeting.... bloody nightmare.
It's not just the coordination either, it's problem solving, the amount of time that "i'm not an (person's profession), but couldn't you do _____" has solved a problem for me blows my mind.
perhaps one needs to know what architects do to pass these tests.
I already commented but I wish I hadn't. This is the best one-liner response to the question/rant.
Sounds like you are almost there. Don't give up just before you finish!
You actually make a good argument to hire an architect. Why would anyone hire planners, engineers, code professionals, attorneys, project managers, construction managers, fire/life safety professionals, architectural designers, interior designers, etc, and try to get them to all work together when you can hire an architect?
As well as have someone, who understands all that, set priorities and give direction and balance the consultants. Ever seen a building designed by an engineer or a code professional? You can pretty much guess at what will be developed and refined, and what is an afterthought. So you end up with exposed conduit just in case you need to work on and service the wiring after a weather event :P
I used to tutor candidates. I would tell them NCARB assumes you can do your job. They assume you can architect. What they test you on is a lot of fringe stuff, they test you on what other people do. They test on HSW topics including construction costs (financial welfare) and your ability to be responsive to the needs of the public and interact with government authorities and best practices because that is what separates someone with knowledge and experience from a professional.
I think you are writing here because you don't want to give up. Don't.
Keep trying. Becoming an architect is difficult. Nothing worthwhile is easy.
I wanted the license to validate my efforts, but I realized that validation is not a good reason for becoming licensed.
It sounds like you really just want to design. If you don't want to do work that licensed architects do, then why get a license? If you want to design, go be a designer. Let someone licensed do the heavy lifting in getting your designs realized. Nothing wrong with that if you find an office that works in that way. Not everyone needs to have a license. Architects are the team. leaders and decision makers. We get all of those specialists together and help them speak the same language to keep the project on track. We talk listen to the owner and make sure they understand where their money is going.
This is a feature not a bug.
The point of NCARB and the AREs is to make getting a license hard and complicated. It keeps people out and prices high. If the tests actually reflected the dificulty of our profession there would be twice as many architects, and everyone would make half as much money.
"...and prices high." I dunno about that.
You really think clients would pay more if there were more architects?
number of licensed architects has less impact on value than the number of unlicensed design and production staff who are doing the work under them; that's where the labor laws of supply and demand come into play. licensure has more to do with who gets to call the shots within the profession. if you actually wanted to affect compensation from the credentialed side, there would be a fee schedule, but we know what happened there...
You really think clients would pay more if there were fewer architects?
The fewer architects that bid on a job the higher the winning bid is going to be. It seems like basic supply and demand to me. Do you have an argument as why hiring an architect would be any different?
yes, reality. you began your post stating that prices are high, which is the first time i've heard anyone say that architects are paid well. the burden of proof is on you.
The architectural service economy doesn't simply follow basic supply and demand economics. While not truly inelastic, the services architects provide have somewhat inelastic demand thanks to a government-granted monopoly to licensed individuals on architectural services. Not to mention that the services those licensed individuals provide are not commodity-like services.
Also, the point of NCARB and ARE is not to make getting a license complicated. It's to make it a measure of competency. Argue that it doesn't fulfill the purpose of measuring competency if you want to, but they aren't setting out trying to make it complicated for the sake of complication and difficulty. The test is set up to establish what a minimally competent architect would know. If you pass that bar, you pass the test. Setting that bar is complicated and it's not a perfect system ... I'm not saying it can't be better. But your off target if you think they are making it difficult just for fun.
I appreciate your willingness to jump in where you know little Rick, but maybe sit this one out before you broadcast your lack of knowledge even more.
"high" prices is all relative. Just because we all wish clients paid more doesn't mean they couldn't possibly pay less. Just to be clear, I'm claiming firm profits will go down, not necessarily that wages will go down. The more people that are bidding on a job, the more likely it is that someone will undercut you because they are OK with taking less profit, or taking the job at cost becasue they need any job to keep going. Im sure you can see it whenever theres a slowdown, but I don't have any data to back it up.
One flaw in your argument is that you assume clients are shopping for architects primarily based on price. I'm sure there is a segment of the industry where this happens, but it's a pretty small segment of the industry in my estimation. Your argument is more apropos to describing contractors competing and bidding on construction work rather than architects competing with each other for design work.
Clients are interested in value, not price.
Pretty big swing and miss there ballerina.
Pretty big swing and miss there ballerina.
in private sector architects can price too low and disqualify themselves. i've worked at a developer and seen this happen. 4 firms invited to submit rfp, 3 are +/- 10% of our target, the other was 40% under target. we assumed that firm either misunderstood what we were asking for or planned to understaff the project. experienced clients don't want their project to fall behind schedule to save 2% of cost on fees.
it is not at all like buying apples, because the "product" doesn't exist yet so you can't actually compare cheap apples to regular ones. But you also know that the cost of labor / services is roughly similar within any market so you can expect any much cheaper one is just going to give you less.
this metaphor is not working.
Balkins' return to the forums is not working.
For the sake of the metaphor ... the client goes to the farmer's market and asks a bunch of architects to give them proposals for a bag of apples. The architects figure out the apples they can put in the bag and the price they think is appropriate. Client looks at the proposals and picks one of the architects. The client isn't simply focused on price per bag (or price per apple) as a simple supply and demand economy would lead you to believe. Instead, they are looking at the bags and the apples they contain to select the bag they think fits their program the best. Then they try to get the architect to lower the price of the bag of apples. They also try to get the architect to include additional apples for no added cost.
Balkins comes into this metaphor because he's the guy outside the market with a bag of wadded up balls of red paper he learned about at Clatsop County CC. He says they are close enough to apples but he can only sell them as apples in Sweden, or he can only sell one of them as an exempt apple as long as the paper ball is less than 4 inches in diameter per Oregon's practice law (but he's the one holding the tape measure and won't allow anyone else to read it). He also goes online and tries to talk with architects about what it is like to cultivate and grow apples despite never having done it before.
It's not enough to study for just one section. You have to be a well rounded individual to pass. They put questions from other sections on each exam. This is a known thing.
I didn't fail any sections under 4.0. I'm not perfect by any means. So, that should imply its certainly doable.
PPD and PDD are pretty comprehensive tests under 5.0. You can't really pass them without knowing a lot of material. In that way, I think they are a better test for competency of well-rounded individuals. Every person I know that had taken the approach of studying for these tests as a way to become a better, more well-rounded, architect has done well on them. The people that I've seen struggle have been the ones that want to cram all the information into their brain, take and pass the test, then forget it.
EA - i've also been finding that approach helpful while in the process of taking my exams (3/6 down so far). Admittedly, yes, taking time away from visiting people/spending time with friends to read about contract law, etc. does kind of suck, and I'd prefer to be elsewhere. But as a method for improving my own daily value to my projects, the prep material and subsequent testing has really helped me improve my skills in the field. There's so much not covered in school, that does need to be covered at some point before getting to the coveted license - I've actually found the process of hard-nosed, head-down reading to be incredibly useful (if often a drag).
Can you expand upon what you're doing with your MPA? I'm a licensed architect with a BArch. But I'm considering getting a either an MPA or MBA part time.
LOL, tldr but you sound salty because you can't pass. They aren't that hard! They don't even have the drawing task anymore.
Cry me a river!
When did you get your license Quentin?
2016, completed within a year
So you where on the ARE 4.0?
He would have been. First scores for 5.0 tests weren't released until 2017.
I thought so but couldn't recall when 5.0 kicked in.
Quentin - you should know that while the 5.0 doesn't have the vignettes anymore they do have pro practice and contracts spread throughout all of the exams. While it's now five exams instead of 7 you're tested on the same amount of information. Basically all they did was cram 7 exams of questions into 5 exams.
6 exams. 5 was only for those transitioning between 4.0 and 5.0 and had passed the right ones in 4.0 first.
Whoops! So 7 exams worth of questions in 6 tests. That's marginally better. :)
k bye!
Stop crying and blaming others for your failures.
Says the unlicensed looser.
I'm not only licensed, I own my own practice, good try Chad.
Just saying:
1] Passing the ARE's is no more than a basic measure of competency for the profession.
2] Have a hobby for your creative outlet ... you likely will not fulfill it in the office.
This can be true as to practice actual architecture you'll need to do things project management, proposals, ect. Not all of your time will be spent designing buildings.
I don't think the problem is a resistance to change. The problem is that things have changed drastically since the 1920s. In the 70s-80s, special interests took over the profession (and the world) to the point were innovation is stifled for architects--it's just a way to grease the wheel for institutions (academic, professional, etc).
Ideally, architects would have a general knowledge of all of the specialties, not a requirement of mastery for every engineering field. You rightly observe that engineers are able to specialize, while European architects have some flexibility in the process. I would be happy if architects used an early 1920s modernist process--but they have no power or will to do so anymore.
Of course the people who are rich / white enough to go through this long pointless process in order to secure a spot at YRP architects inc. is going to defend it. They have a secure 65k a year spot designing gas stations and hospitals in Denver. However the built world doesn't improve when architects are trained to be cad monkeys and 2nd class engineers who just mindlessly follow wherever the regulations lead.
"special interests took over the profession" ..For example?
"I would be happy if architects used an early 1920s modernist process" Also would love some elaboration on what this process is, to you.
"Ideally, architects would have a general knowledge of all of the specialties, not a requirement of mastery for every engineering field."
This was the statement I was wondering about. How is this different today? I don't know about you all, but I feel like I have a "general knowledge of [most] specialties" rather than a "mastery for every engineering field." I don't think I know a single architect that I would think has a mastery in any type of engineering field.
.... except "Value Engineering"
I know very damn few architects and zero engineers or construction managers who have mastery in value engineering.
does anyone have mastery in value engineering? I mean real value engineering, not cost cutting.
i despise the way terms like value engineering have snuck into the jargon in order to obscure what is they're actually describing. VE properly done implies a change that increased costs could be made if it proportionately increases value. This is never what is really desired though... since it's just an unnecessary euphemism for cost reduction.
There was a time when I would deliberately add things to projects as a ruse to direct the VE efforts. Higher finishes in places that did not matter, SS handrails in egress only stairs, that sort of thing. I made it easier to negotiate on the items that mattered. Can't do that anymore tho. We work with CM offices that VE everything.
NS that reminds me of a story I read once about a software design firm who would include a picture of a duck on every page in the software they designed so that when the client reviewed the work they would say "Looks great! Just get rid of the duck."
One of my prof-prac teachers had a similar story where they would include a section in their spec book that required the GC to buy pizza for each meeting just to see if they read the docs. Only once, if I recall correctly that a GC followed through and paid for lunch. A credit for the value of future lunches was issued afterwards.
We did the same thing at the first firm I worked at. In the GC of the specs we had the contractor required to buy beer. No one reads the GC of the spec until there is a problem.
Ah, the Brown M&M clause. Brilliant move.
During the recession, I worked a short construction job for a certain renowned hippie environmentalist architect, and in his contract he required the client to show up at 4pm with enough beer for the whole crew. Every, single, day. Fun job.
4:30 pm - nothing is square or plumb. A lot of hammers and speed squares misplaced.
back when i worked with my hands, the firm owner would leave on Friday to go get beers and that was all of our cue to clean up. A spotless shop upon return meant he was paying for the beer that week.
Since I'm a pedant I'll point out that the specs don't have General Conditions (GC). They have the General Requirements (Div 01). The construction agreement has the General Conditions.
That's probably an ARE question so I guess we're back on topic!
You know it! https://archexamacademy.com/know-the-difference-general-conditions-general-requirements-supplementary-conditions-special-conditions/
"With planners, engineers, code professionals, attorneys, project managers, construction managers, fire/life safety professionals, architectural designers, interior designers, etc, I am not sure why architects exist at all."
This idea has been shared many times, but rarely challenged. Yes it is "possible" that somehow a group of professionals could somehow create a code complaint building. Anyone who has ever worked on an actual project more complicated than a strip mall or SFR should know that this would be an absolute disaster.
My experience is that when the architect do their job well, it seems easy and like maybe an architect isn't needed. Every contractor and many of the engineer led projects that I've been a part of have been very difficult for everyone involved.
as a tangent i always bring these up when people make vague complaints about how architects mismanage costs and schedule. as if civil infrastructure projects without architecture management go any better. (the big dig, second ave subway, any airport runway expansion, power plants, etc) the main issue is that the people with expertise are rarely the ones deciding key issues of process, budget, and goals.
LOL! I worked for one of the big dig firms roughly 10 years ago! The firm leaders gave the architects a lot of freedom, with the exception that projects had to make money. No such thing as a "loss leader" or a low margin "prestige" project. Fortunately I was 1,000 miles away and had no connection to the Big Dig!
Notice the original author hasn't come back to converse. This is typical of candidates who can't pass, they just want it handed to them because they have x, y, and z and deserve it. Don't be like this guy. He'll probably pass the next two if he just takes them. After all, he knows what's on the test now.
OP is a disgruntled wanker who has no idea what architects do so it's no big loss. Just an old man yelling at clouds. Nothing to see here.
he took his belongings and went home
yet this thread gained a lot of traction. definitely some truth to complaints regarding ncarb. i agree the exams aren't that tough, but they are unnecessarily lengthy and costly. i'm fortunate to have the adequate resources to tackle them, but not everyone does.
This seems like a fun thread ... kinda like arguing on Twitter! All I will say is that when I went to write my exams some 30+ years ago we all sat in a big gymnasium and did multiple exams per day over a three day period. I remember thinking to myself and mentioned to a few buddies who were doing the same exams ( several national award winning architects ) how I could tell why our profession was so fucked just by looking at the people writing the exams. Out of a room of 80-100 people only about 5 I would consider designers with any skill or passion the rest might as well have been techs. It was a sad sight that the majority would never make any significant contribution to the profession or be considered a model to look up to as far as a leader in the field.
Think about when you graduated and went to watch each of your classmates thesis presentations ..... how many of those folks would you actually hire to design and build you a house, someone who could design it, deliver it and understand all complexities of the structure, building performance and family dynamics and unique circumstances of a site .... I could only think of 2 guys! Happy to say I would still hire either of those guys today.
alternative take: people like you, who think that only 5% of those in architecture are "real designers" and "leaders," are "why our profession [is] fucked"
I was being generous by saying that there were 5%. It's the same in every profession, think about it, not everyone needs or wants to be the Alpha Male / Female that the profession needs. It's not an ego trip, it's a commitment.
2% is what Frankie would say...
no, it's really not. architecture is unique in how wrapped up it is in neoliberal, ego-based individualism. most of the teachers, doctors, and policy people i know could give two shits about "making a significant contribution"- they simply aim to do their work well.
i'm glad younger generations aren't falling for this attitude; hopefully we'll see it die out. funny how the oldies think the young ones are the snowflakes who need trophies and praise..
absolutely agree Whistler! I haven't been out of school (that) long and arch education has already changed so much! We started with 97 students in a 5-year Masters program and of those like 19 graduated. The rest failed out or were strongly encouraged to find another profession. I teach now and I can't even give a goddam "C" without getting threatening emails from some spoiled brat's parents, or questions from the administration about why students are struggling so much in my studio. Why? Because they are a fuckin ding-dong who has no business being an architect.
I'm with Frank! Although I couldn't live in any of his house's
it does seem that a lot of dissatisfaction in architecture seems to come from people who don't even like designing buildings or even understand what the role of a designer is.
the irony is you don't see the connection between the idealist, entitled graduates you all complain about and the overinflated sense of importance, competition, and ego you attached to architecture studio. 19/97 graduating isn't something to be proud of, it's an embarrassment for your program. med school is much more difficult than architecture school, yet the graduation rates are much higher.
https://www.aamc.org/data-repo...
architecture isn't rocket science; maybe if you spent less time trying to be frank and more time teaching the basics, we'd have a better prepared work force.
If we spent less time coddling entitled kids and encouraged them to go into a profession they could hack it in, we would also have a better prepared workforce.
and in many firms, design is only done in this "gated community/ivory tower" "we're the designers and you are production caste
I really tried my best, for ten years, sometimes I passed but most of the times I failed, at the end the rolling clock would bite me in the ass and had to start over, after ten years I decided to quit. I know colleagues are disappointed in me, but I realized I was pushing hard for something unattainable for me. I admit, every time a coworker passes the tests I get happy for them and depressed for my own self. It was THE goal of my life and I didn’t achieve it. It has been three years since I gave up and I am still struggling with depression about it, some days are better some are not. ARE destroyed my self esteem, I hope others don’t get to live my situation.
There is a habit of people in this field not being able to balance what is good for them and what they want. I applaud your ability to stop. Your colleagues shouldn't be disappointed, they should be proud of you for doing what was best for you.
I had a good friend in a similar situation, and the reality is that I could never tell if it was that she was bad at tests, unlucky, or just really didn't try hard enough at studying. I realized that it wasn't my damn business or place to judge. She was good at her job, and did what was best for her by stopping. Those are all anyone should hold you accountable to.
I quit licensure soon after being forced to transition to ARE 5.0 - NCARB made it sound like something new and beautiful. I make a good living designing residential homes in TX without a license. I am glad i quit testing when I did because looking back it was a waste of my time and happiness. My husband is an accountant and he calls NCARB a pyramid scheme. There was a recent post about NCARB's tax documents so I showed my husband. In 2017, NCARB administered approx 50,000 exams which paid for massive salaries. The CEO of NCARB makes $40k/month, and then go down to $35k/month, $25K/month, and so on. What was interesting is that the revenue NCARB makes from exams equals the salaries of NCARB staff. Is there any question why, when NCARB reduced exams by one, that the cost of exams increased? If you don't know the answer, I hope you are not performing any calculations. As another point of reference, the org that sponsors the PE exam, they spend 100% of exam revenues on exam development and implementation and pay one executive about $25k/month and that's it. NCARB spends on 1/2 of exam revenues on exam development and implementation and pays for numerous exorbitant salaries. NCARB IRS 990: https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/d...
Anyhoo, based on the $11,000,000 in revenue NCARB made in 2017 from exam attempts (passed and failed), and let's assume exams were $225 (yes i know there are now $235), there are approximately 50K NCARB exams being taken every year. What NCARB refuses to publish is, 1) how many exams per year of total exam taken are "Fails," and 2) how many licenses are being issued every year. Well, NCARB won't release the latter data because they conveniently defer to the states which are fragmented (NCARB has the data, c'mon - if they don't they are incompetent). However, they do keep data about how many exam attempts are "Fails" and they refuse to release that data to the public.
The whole reason my husband calls it a pyramid scheme is because NCARB refuses to release data about exactly how the $11,000,000 breaks down. Obviously NCARB encourages people to take more and more exams because it is in NCARB's interest to make the licensure process as difficult as possible because that = more moola. The BS though is that NCARB does not exist to protect the health and safety of the public -that is the job of state and local jurisdictions. NCARB's only interest is to keep a steady flow of revenue into NCARB's coffers to pay for the $40,000/per month salary of the CEO and the outlandish salaries of other unnecessary executive staff.
So I disagree that the essence of NCARB is killing architecture. But I do agree that the people that run NCARB are definitely suffocating the profession for their own financial gain and the states are failing licensed professionals. I can also say that I am glad I quit NCARB when I did. I only wish I had done it sooner.
i'd agree the essence of ncarb is creating an unregulated intermediary to siphon money out of a regulatory system that's of no interest to the public. good for you that you figured out you can do your work without their sanction. it's essentially a lawful cartel.
Bulgar, residential still needs to go through permitting, inspections, etc. the builders are also licensed. The safety stuff is covered, so why should an architect license be required? It’s a bit different in commercial, because you are dealing with more complex issues, but residential is pretty straightforward.
Maybe the AIA should investigate this matter
The fact is that in all states, you do not need a license to design residential structures that are two stories or less above a basement. If you don't know that, then read your state's practice laws. It's not a Texas thing, it a national thing. I have designed homes in CA, NV, TX, and NM. I get that license folks might be upset when they hear that (which is strange because I thought that was common knowledge), but it's a fact: you do not need to have a license to produce drawings for residential structures 2 stories or less. And with COVID and the subsequent telework across the entire country, there is going to be MUCH less need for new space, hence much less need for a license that is already not needed. And even new space, when needed, can be designed by an engineer, just tilt-up structures or factory built stuff. It may not look pretty, but what looks pretty in the US anyways? ...not much...
I would suggest that any NCARB exec or Board member must pass the NCARB exam, no matter how many years ago they got licensed. Many of them probably never took an NCARB exam and I would also guess that many of them have no formal education. In CA you can still become licensed with ZERO education. Bottom line is that an architect license is becoming more and more irrelevant and useless because it's based on principals from the 1800's. This is 2020, almost 2021. The only people who give two sh*ts about a license are other architects - it's a cult like religion or AA. Licensed architects want to recruit other people to the club to get licensed because it validates their efforts. But to people outside of the cult, well, nobody gives a sh*t. And that's where NCARB and AIA come in - they want $$, they don't care about "architecture." Their existence depends on contributions from those who buy into the cult. But the cult is dying. It's unfortunate because although NCARB is crap (NCRAP), there is value in architectural education and experience, but our value as designers has been stymied for so long by NCARB/AIA that other professions (interiors, construction mangers, engineers, planners) have stepped in to assume those roles.
It's simple supply/demand. How many buildings are going to be erected in the next decade that need an architect to build? Answer = 0. You don't need an architect to build a building. COVID has shown that telework is healthy for employers and employees and the cost of commercial real estate has plummeted. In efforts to falsely inflate the value of an architects services, NCRAP has made it ridiculously difficult to become licensed. But architects are not trained in business. Ultimately what NCRAP's efforts will prove, when only a couple hundred licensed architects exists in the US, is that architects are no more valuable than a licensed shoe-shiner. It's sad but it's too late.
How many times do you have to be kicked off a forum before you get the hint, Balkins?
It's there to ignore you until you get banned again. How many times has Balkins been kicked off this site?
You've been banned, several times. I think that is relevant to any thread you post in.
I think we should have a feature installed that hides Balkins posts with a warning about questionable information, similar to Twitter.
Or the admins could just kick out the latest version of Balkins.
There seems to be a reluctance.
when you think you're contributing something useful.. the key word is credibility, and you ain't got it.
Haha yeah I don't think anything on this site is worth arguing over. People actually get kicked off the site?!?
As far as residential structures, if you simply design according to the codes there isn't much that can go wrong - it's pretty straight-forward. Of course, there are conditions that require some brainstorming and creative thinking, especially with the higher-end homes, but it's not rocket science or brain surgery (engineering or medicine lol).
NCARB is why I chose not to get licensed because, 1) the return on time and money invested just isn't there (my research showed that, for example, a career in codes or planning can be much more lucrative than architectural practice and no license is necessary), and 2) NCARB refuses to release data that would answer my questions about the future of working in architecture, probably because the data is not favorable. Instead of going to the dentist or doctor, when is that last time you heard somebody say, "Honey, I need to go to the architect this week..." or instead of a business consulting legal, "...John/Jane, that's a great idea, but we should consult architecture before moving forward..." Nobody even likes architects except for other architects lol.
Occasionally I work with a retired architect (he's in his 70's). He has no architecture degree, never took an NCARB exam (he took the exam before NCARB replaced state exams). He tells me that back in the day, architects used to "get their hands dirty" but now it's all about art and sculpture and pretty ideas and words. I agree with him. I hated architecture school just for those reasons: there was no practicality/reality in architecture school. It was such a joke - all about pretty pictures and buildings that would never stand up in reality, much less get built.
This site is sort-of addicting! I suppose I will leave with this: for me personally, I don't understand why architects think architects and architecture is so special... it's just a job and it doesn't even pay all that well. If you're an artist go be an artist but spare me all the "Well then you don't have passion..." or "...it's an art form..." Puh-lease! But seriously, can anybody explain why architects feel the need to inflate architecture into some philosophical and academic "thing" when it is just providing instructions on how to put something together?
Agree and disagree. It’s like being a chef, some freeze a pea in liquid nitrogen, put it on a lamb testicle, and sell it for 200$ a plate...others cook food that most people want to eat, and call it a day. There is a place for everything, and it’s stupid that ncarb makes someone who designs houses jump through the same hoops as someone who designs skyscrapers.
So you chose not to become licensed because NCARB made it too difficult?
Just providing instructions on how to put something together... and vision of what that something is. Oh and please translate the current modes of production, economic efficiencies, and cultural zeitgeist into something both beautiful and build-able. Oh, also make sure the thing you design is safe and no one dies in a fire. Oh yeah, almost forgot, can you make it accessible to the differently-abled? Remember also we have a maximum budget. And it can't just be all these things, it has to comply with the adopted legislation (sometimes thousands of pages long) codifying these things.
It's no wonder you didn't become an architect...
I often wonder who makes all these one hit wonders that get the regular's all worked up here at archinect.
True - but it doesn't mean you shouldn't. Now go get banned again .
Blah, blah, blah. I'm not reading that. You've been banned multiple times for sexist and racist posts. Take the hint and leave. You're not welcome here.
Rick: "Small residential projects, the typical stuff is going to treat you like a Chinese sweat shop making you work 80-100 hours a week for peanuts and nickels"
Nope. I work 55 hours a week (because we're inundated with projects), and we make out just fine as a firm with our residential work.
"With residential projects, you are competing with contractors providing the "same" (from the perspective of the client) services you are
offering "on paper""
Try again. Our clients come to us because, as architects, we're educated and trained to understand not only aesthetic design, but also budget and time management, and coordination between the G.C., our consulting engineers (of which there are many here in Florida), the various trades, and the whims of the Owner. We're providing services the G.C. could never achieve on their own, and it's in large part due to the training and education we do in our specific profession as architects.
Well, Bulgar and RCZ, you are both incorrect: I make more money than most senior registered architects in TX and my business is built entirely on referrals that span multiple states. Unless you're talking about massive multifamily residential, an architect isn't necessary. I see why this might upset you because it's work that you won't get (for the same work, I can charge lower fees which further expands my client base). But most of an architects work is commercial, most commercial is crap, and much commercial doesn't need an architect (an engineer can substitute for an architect). And buildings are so complex now that consultants do all the technical work because the architect does not have the necessary level of technical expertise.
Also, technology and building codes are going in the direction of standardization. ADU's are in the codes now, factory built and modular housing is becoming more mainstream. A mid-rise residential tower was recently built in Dallas and it was entirely factory built/modular. Not sure if an architect was involved, but since each dwelling unit was designed/constructed individually in a factory, not sure an architect was required. Just needed an engineer to design the connection between the units and a construction manager to oversee the assembly once the units arrived to the site. This technology is already becoming part of large commercial projects, too.
And to some of the nasty posts...no need to be nasty or make this personal - these are just opinions and observations. I chose not to become licensed and I think there should be more of a discussion why people choose this and why people leave practice. On the third year of my B. Arch, I realized architecture school was BS but I was going to finish what I started. After finishing my B. Arch, I was recruited by an international firm where I completed my IDP. I saw the long hours and grueling work that the registered architects put in, they made an architect salary, and architects just don't make that much money. The principals made a lot of money but they were very old. I don't want to work into my 70's. So I put the license behind me and became a "Residential Designer" and went into business for myself. But to get back to the original post (no need to be nasty and make this personal), the "architect" is becoming irrelevant, extinct, and what I think the original poster was referring to is that the NCRAP/NAAB/AIA complex is doing nothing to fix it. Instead, they perpetuate the same archaic ideas about architectural practice which is why the architect is becoming extinct. The original posts asks, what does an architect do that can't be done by somebody else... this is why the architect is becoming extinct because the answer it "not much..." Someday, maybe I will need a registered architect and I will hire you, how's that? You can design the bathrooms ;-)
I did my contractors license instead...design-build is so much more lucrative.
“guess people get what they pay for in terms of design when they hire a contractor.” I have an m-arch and I’m a very good designer. I also know how to build things. You jelly?
“All a contractor/builder cares about is two things: executing a design per plan that is on time and on budget.” Tell that to my stone fabricator lolololol.
“No, because if your work is a McMansion, your comment about being a “good designer” cancels itself out.“ - what makes you think I do McMansions? I don’t even do houses, I do landscapes...and my ceilings are always nicer than yours.
BB, you missed my joke...my ceilings are the sky...get it. Never mind
“his ability” “his design training”...very sexist
In a time where half of academia is female, at least take a second to write “he/her”. As a professional you can do better to lift up our sisters.
"A mid-rise residential tower was recently built in Dallas and it was entirely factory built/modular. Not sure if an architect was involved, but since each dwelling unit was designed/constructed individually in a factory, not sure an architect was required."
I presume by "was built" this implies you were not involved.
My office has worked on several modular projects recently, and it has required every bit as much attention from the architect. It's just a construction type, it still needs design and coordination from someone, IE an architect. Sure, the architect could be inside the manufacturer or contractor team, but people are still there doing architecture. (it's probably a distinct separate firm though)
...my point is that one does not need a license to make a nice living designing buildings. You might call them McMansions, I call it McMoney, setting my own McSchedule, and watching my McBankAccount McGrow. By the way, the state of TX adopts building codes which then apply to cities and counties (not just cities). Am I the only woman on this thread?
Buildings are art and science, but architects don't do the science because they lack the expertise. So that leaves art. And the budgets for most commercial buildings don't have room for artsy-fartsy crap. In fact, most buildings are not art at all - they are just boxes that sort-of protect us from the elements. So where does that leave architects?
So RCZ, no need for foul language. The reason I stopped pursuing the license, even though I finished my IDP hours, is a few things. One: pursuing the license didn't align with my values, two: I realized that I don't need a license to make money and 3: because my time/money was better spent elsewhere (relationship, starting my own business instead of making some old fat guys rich). Also, all the NCRAP rules, the rule changes that occurred while I was doing this... When I first started out, you couldn't start taking your exams until you completed your degree AND IDP hours. Now you can become licensed by the time you graduate! What does that say about a license (answer: it's not that valuable - I wouldn't hire somebody right our of school and expect them to perform duties of a registered architect). The only reason NCRAP exists is to fund the $40,000/month salaries the execs provide to themselves. Add to that the education that I knew didn't prepare me for actual practice (and I went to Rice but all NAAB programs are basically the same).
Stop drinking the kool-aid while you are still young: architecture is not special, there's nothing more special about architecture than there is about septic tank cleaning. Buildings are boxes with little tubes and wires in the walls, and they keep some elements outside. Some boxes are big, some boxes are small. The rest is academic fluff; just pretty words and pictures. If, for a moment, the practice of architecture was going to be re-thought and the license would be...ummmm...not some unnecessary fossil/artifact, I would consider starting my exams again. I would love to go into architectural research or specialize in environmental behavior, but that's not how the system is set up. Currently, the NCRAP/NAAB/AIA system is set up so that architecture is was it was 100 years ago. By the way, these are my opinions - no need for the foul language or getting upset.
Is there not a McForum where you can take your McMoney and talk your McShit while beauty, art and culture in the mother of all arts dies over here with the real architects?
excuses are easy. sorry, excuses are Mceasy.
If you want an echo chamber of your own opinion, a discussion forum isn't the best place to be. Do you have any critical thought/ideas to add?
Yeah, but can a kangaroo design a house in Oregon without a boxing license or does they has to be a human?
"Buildings are art and science, but architects don't do the science because they lack the expertise"
Really? God must be nice to just get paid to draw pretty pictures of buildings that other people do all the work to actually get built indicated by the fact that you have to do no details, coordination, construction administration, and have the smallest sheet set.... oh wait.
Janette - you could simply post up some examples of your work and how much you make a year to show how successful and talented you are.
Ha, so funny seeing so many egotistic "architects" or "architect wannabe" getting enraged by Janette. From the posts above, seems like Janette is doing those boring 2x4 vinyl houses in Texas that does not require licenses to stamp drawing. It is definitely good money, if you utilize your drawing library and do repeat build. To me, it is not architectural success, more of business success, architecture is just the medium in this case, not much different from selling cars. Hard to judge because it is all about ones value. One could be a licensed architect working in firms like KPF 60 HR/week doing skyscraper tower stair details making 65K.
6 digits, site-built homes.
Hey, 6 digits can be 100,000 to 999,999. There is a huge difference. 100K is not bad but meh still achievable with salary. 200k-300k, now we are talking sweet stuff.
I have done some factory-built homes; not double-wide mobile homes, for example check out Blu Homes. I want to do more of these. The level of detail and accuracy one can achieve with factory-built versus site-built is incredible. My hubby and I live in a factory-built and nobody can even tell. Anyways, I think I am done here... there isn't much "discussion" on this forum, it's seems like it's about a bunch of guys saying the same thing over and over to inflate their ego... licensed folks have a lot of power - change the system! Call out your state boards and NCRAP.
Janette - seriously, post up some of your work and how much you make - it will shut up the haters. I know you said six figures but as Jay said - that's a huge range. Also how many hours a year do you work?
Pre-fab house and site built are the same thing. Factory has more control offering higher consistency and quality. The cost is the same though, that is why prefab never took off in the market. Low end residential house is not really a market for architect.It is the same blue print used repeatedly for mass produced product. Only 2% residential project involves architect, mostly high end custom stuff. If one architect touches those vinyl house, the person definitely failed the business in public, have to retreat to the cheap markets. Public work like education is way more lucrative in terms of smash and grab projects.1st firm i worked out of school loves those low end smash and grab projects, often does not want to actively pursue large projects. Did a Roof replacement job in two weeks from survey to CD set out to bid. I think the fee was around 20K for that. 2 Weeks of intern survey & drafting with few hours supervisor review for $20K. Of course often time we troll around and drag the time longer. Imagine you work 2 weeks and get paid 20K, man that is awesome, of course there are some overheads, but how much can that be. Now remember, you need license to sign and seal those drawings for public jobs. That is why i am trying to get it, studying for test now. Oh sht, have i let the secrets out.
"anti-hetereosexuality comments by several forum regulars and their demands for heterosexual males to change their sexual orientation"
Utter fantasy. Never happened. You have, however, made comments that are either outright racist or outright homophobic or are posted due to such ignorance as to make no difference. I would post links but they have been purged. You want to be treated like an adult, learn to act like one and don't resort to slurs.
rick's actually a genius. spams anything with regard to the profession right into oblivion.
The time for loathing NCARB is after you pass your tests and realize that you have to keep cutting checks each year in their 'pay-to-play' scheme for reciprocity.
Buck up, study the material and pass the tests. It's a battle of wills, not of knowledge. Something tells me your attitude will shift once you're a member of the club. You tend to get a little territorial about it after you're on the other side.
I try to remind myself not to be as territorial but it never works. One of the reasons I pushed early for my license was because it bothered me that I couldn't call myself an Architect. Every time I see someone calling themselves one when they're not licensed I involuntarily twitch even though I tell myself it doesn't affect me one way or another. Either you can sign drawings or you can't, the rest is just semantics.
I think when you're on the unlicensed side of the gate it's natural to be adversarial to the system, I know I repeatedly cursed about the exams. But it was more of a "It's me vs these exams" kind of way not a "I don't like these so they shouldn't be here" kind of way.
It's not that bad.
There was a rant here an hour or so ago that dragged this horse back into the beating circle. That user used their real name so probably deleted their account to save themselves some embarrassent.
Wait, your real name isn't Non Sequitur?!?
Yours isn't RJ87?! I'm disappointed.
What a thread.
I'd forgotten about the apple metaphor
Your response was beautiful
Wow, yeah. That's art EA.
Thanks. Every once in a while I have a good day. I think Rick's response of just "ok..." is what seals it.
I'm surprised the internet as a whole was permitted to continue it's existence following that apple example.
The Purpose for NCARB and the exams is to set a Minimum Bar for competency to be an architect. This is just how it is, we don't give out drivers licences to folks who can't pass the exam or have physical impairments that would make them an unsafe driver nor do we grant architect's licences or registration to people who can not pass the exams. Many folks have long successful careers and never get a licence. The exams in conjunction with an internship with a diverse range of experiences is the best option we have to figure out who has the minimum qualifications to be an architect. This is not about keeping folks out of a profession but about protecting the public from incompetence and swindlers who would otherwise pose as a competent professional when they are not.
Over and OUT
Peter N
it really isn't though- it's an economic tool to control the number of licensed professionals. and it's a relatively new one at that. codes and zoning do far more to keep people safe than credentials.. as you said, there are plenty of successful individuals participating in architecture, safely, without licenses.
https://www.economist.com/unit...
Testing is not a quantifier of knowledge for many reasons. Tests for licenses do not set a bar for competencies because most tests are based on academia and not practicum.Ironically the individuals who build these exams do not live in practicum but rather have academic presence and notoriety and to quote "cannot make it in the real world". Do we "pour or place concrete" the answer to an academic in the profession will tell you "place" the practicum will tell you "pour"...the tests are written for people 3 years out of school...need I say more?
This is not true. Have you ever been to one of the NCARB volunteering opportunities to help write testing?
well the DMV is issuing drivers license now to students who can easily pass an online, unobserved exam while easily cheating—- yes —-Covid changed things. So yes, licenses are now easily given out.
I'm waiting on the day they start making people 75+ retake the exam every few years.
NCARB sucks, exam sucks, it's not okay to be underpaid with student loan AND prepare for six exams, but there are plenty of people that pass the exams, get licensed and not getting paid that reflecting their efforts, but still okay with their profession, or like, or heck, love the profession.
But seriously, if life is too hard on you, if one way is not working or the future looks grey, go switch to another one.
If you decided to stay on, I hope you find your support system, a good friend who knows the pain, or a good therapist.
It's been a while since your original post, but I hope you didn't waste your life debating the profession on the internet.
The accredited architectural schools should teach the essentials required to pass the test with ease. The schools should not 'teach the tests' but make sure all the salient points are covered and understood by everyone graduating. Five years of schooling with As and Bs and the students repeatedly fail the tests? No. Something is badly wrong.
They should, but the skilled professionals on some faculties are also outnumbered by the de facto artists and PhDs more interested in that one book they read on object oriented ontology than in the art and science of building. Their work focuses on ... themselves - studying the study of architecture rather than making architecture.
I'm of the opinion that construction methods & design studios should hold equal weight in school.
Another glaring difference with architecture schools is that it's objectively hard to "fail". Because design studios are so subjective, as long as you show up and produce something you'll pass. As a result you end up with a lot of folks with an undergraduate (or even graduate) degree that just kind of floated through school. In other professional degrees, there's usually a number of exams along the way that ensure a higher minimum competency of graduates.
Unless they make the exams easier (which I would surely hope they don't), I don't see pass rates improving significantly as long as the profession doesn't require licensure to participate in the majority of tasks related to architecture. As long as they can put graduates into the profession, schools won't particularly care if you get licensed or not so they won't focus on preparing you for the exams. Compare it with doctors, nurses, lawyers, even hairdressers that can't fully operate within the profession without a license.
you are 100% correct - just talked to my Albuquerque architect and he had hired a graduate M.Arch. because he saw potential in him - he wanted him to detail a backsplash and toe kickspace - he didn't know what these were - the architect had to take him to the breakroom to point these out - true story from last week ...
Good TED talk.
I'll take things that didn't happen for $100 Alex.
I say, take the NCARB, and turn it into an "Architectural Labor Union", to protect its workers from the exploitation of its employers, and their bad business I practice models.
Well I though once I get my 4 year Bachelors Degree in Architecture, I would then become an Architect. Although, when I was working in
Architecture after some 15 years, and started on the drawing board, and now I have around 10 years on auto-cad, I would then have some type of competition and job stability. What I find now is unemployment since I'm not licensed. I'm looking, but no one will hire me again since 2017.
I blame it on Architecture itself, and the companies who profiteer on this type of business model. Its a non-humanist approach to employees or people. I've been here in Miami Fl. all of my life, and cannot find work! They wanted me to attend FAU to complete the fifth year in Ft. Lauderdale. I'm blindly suppose to travel that far away for a so called one more year professional degree and then jump through a bunch more hoops as If I'm just beginning?
Makes no sense what so ever when I cannot even hold a job long-term in Architecture for no longer than 4 years (manual Drafting) in all my 15 years. Never fails, They always let me go because of a lack of work. Then, I will collect unemployment (business owners hate), and I am unemployed for at least two more years, but now its been 5 years.
No thanks, apparently this is what my future will be like as an Architect, is to hire and fire everyone after a year, or two, when the work is completed. Is this called competition or exploitation? If your very young, and just starting in architecture, get out while you still can.
Be thankful that you have the knowledge in architecture, and that the Architects are using you to finish what they don't have the ability to do themselves. To show you their thanks, they will chuck you out like an old dish rag. Again, I say, take the NCARB, and turn it onto an Architectural Labor Union, to protect its workers from its employers!
This is all bullcrap. Try the real world and practice on your own, have real clients, and then you will realize organizations like ncarb and aia are the reason you get paid, or have any say in the building process. If there was no organization, no laws, no standards, anyone with ability to draft would be able to work on designing a building.
Get over youself, be a man and pass the exam, if you cant then you arent worthy, go into the bitching business.
Um. No.
Toxic masculinity, is that you?
What a fucking wanker.
“Anyone with the ability” what a tragedy that would be. Image people with the ability to do something doing that thing without first having to succumb to a Kafka bukaki fest.
While I think your choice of words is gross, this may be one small area where you and I align.
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
You'd like the stuff I've worked on. I'm not interested in sharing, though. I don't need validation.
In case you missed it red, jla was being sarcastic.
RedRoverArchitect - start a thread to share work. The first post can be some of your work. I'll wait.
You're not impressing anyone with your empty flex there, RedRover.
RedRoverArchitect - I'm being serious. This isn't meant as an insult or diss. Post up your work.
On a side note, why did you delete your post RRA?
^probably because it was an attempt to doxx. Not sure why my comment is hidden tho. Boo urns.
That's a funny way of trying that. Why would anyone try to doxx anyone? Seems like a waste of time.
I can still see you comment NS. I just have to click 'view comment'.
Seems like they weren't happy with the result based on the thumbs down you both have.
What an interesting username! I wonder what it means? /s
Yep. I guess RRA is just another childish wanker. Nothing of worth was lost today.
Welp, thumbs down are gone. Guess the BGH got involved
EA - it sounds like you know who RRA was / is. ;)
Not the brightest, are you.
No idea who they are ... don't really care. The thumbs down weren't from anyone under a real name unless their parents had some type of axe to grind against archinect when they decided on their legal name.
Good lord ..lol..
I see we've come almost full circle on Rick's contributions to this thread. We've got him posting under his rcz1001 alias as well as now his real name. Next step to finish this out is for him to get all his comments nuked and come back with a different account and post some more.
I still stand by my apple metaphor. Rick, have you sold any "apples" in Sweden recently ... or at all?
I don't think the profession is f$*&ed. I don't think the licensing process is f*#@ed. Are there improvements that can be made - sure. Are improvements being made - sure. Will the profession or the licensing process be perfect - never.
I think the general direction of the profession is actually heading in a good direction (albeit slowly). In stark contrast to many other professions, it seems like the older architects in the industry genuinely want the younger generation to be able to do better for themselves and the world than they could.
By contrast, it seems that a lot of the people complaining about the nebulous "profession of architecture" never really jumped fully in anyway (those who gave up on licensure, or who fell through the cracks and jumped to another profession altogether). All this is just my own experiences, so yada yada grain of salt.
I'm always astonished how little, people know what NCARB does, who is responsible for establishing the organization, and who funds it.
I'm assuming Chad's comment was to someone else who has since had their comment(s) removed from the thread. Otherwise, I don't know why Chad is responding the way he is.
You would be correct EA. My response was to a comment from Rick that has been removed.
https://youngarchitect.com/exp...
Having just completed a coast to coast bicycle ride I will also pass along words of wisdom from my daughter's 5th grade class, "just keep pedaling"
Beautiful. Found your blog and going to check it out now. Recently watched a few vids of this ride. How are you feeling post ride? I hope it was an amazing time. Have you watched TWO YEARS ON A BIKE on youtube by Martjin D.? Highly recommend....
pandahut,
I finished the ride on Oct. 28 and I am feeling great, thanks.
And yes it was an amazingly beautiful personal experience and I highly recommend this for everyone that can find the time. I still need to do some sort of an epilogue for the journal but the journal was a great way to help remember things.
https://www.crazyguyonabike.co...
I will watch TWO YEARS ON A BIKE on your recommendation.
I watched 2 years and it is a very good production. It is interesting to me that he needed the desert to formulate his thoughts and to recalibrate because that is what I felt in the desert. The solitude forces one to be introspective. Most of the time when I think back I place myself i n the desert. Alone.
For F sakes that's a really long way of saying we are being screwed.