I am trying to gauge how many people are currently having some of their experience invalidated by the NCARB, because of the six-month rule? How can this mandate effect so many people and continue to operate unchecked? Personally, I see it as a scheme to keep people as interns for longer and longer. Why is the door closing on our profession? Getting experience and trying to get licensed is incredibly frustrating, especially if you feel like you’ve already earned it!
I agree. It's a way of slowing down the process. Though I don't think I've already earned it, especially when I study for the exams. Then I realize that I have much to learn and I'm glad the stamps aren't given away so easily. There would be a lot of unqualified architects running around. But the six month rule and the easy possibility of losing experience if you don't keep up with your record is complete bs.
"Why, yes sir Mr. Client, I was sort of aware that the pricing set was needed at your contractor's office last week, but you know it just kinda slipped my mind. Oh, and by the way, here's my final invoice for those drawings I did for you last summer - it's probably a little more than you were expecting - I hope the five month delay doesn't complicate your cash flow situation too much."
Part of being a professional is discipline and punctuality. If you can't stay on top of your NCARB record (which is relatively easy) you're going to be sunk when you start having some real responsibilities.
how exactly does the 6 month rule increase the possibility of losing experience?
If there wasnt the 6 month rule, i bet 95% of the interns would not do their hours until they thought they were complete, and then they would scramble to get 3-4 years of hours signed off on all at once, probably from old employers
then they would complain when they are all not accepted instantly
It actually makes getting your hours accepted easier, and basically, you have to fill out something online, what, twice a year?
NCARB doesnt have a lot of things right, that is definitely true. But the 6 month rule along with the online submission is something that is a step in the right direction
And really, if you cant remember to get your hours signed off every 6 months, you deserve to lose that time
At the Annual Meeting in June 2008, NCARB’s Member Boards voted 49-1 in favor of implementing Resolution 2008-07 aka the Six-Month Rule.
Ah, June of '08. Everyone in the profession is gainfully employed. Decent salaries, plenty of work. Real-estate can only go up-up-up! Get a loan and get in on the action!
By 2011 we'll all be brazillionaires.
I want to find out who dat one dark cloud who voted no is. This recession is all his/her fault.
still funny how you can take the exams and pass them but not get licensed because you didn't have the idp hours, seriously...... this is one reason why i think idp is bullshit........but hey, i know folks with builders license's that are making moves and designing/building smaller scale projects......think about that....
i think the point behind that is that there is more to being an architect than just being able to pass a couple of exams
now whether or not the arbitrary number of hours that IDP requires is relevant.....thats another question
some kid out of school who happens to be a good test taker could study a bit and pass the exams. I dont know if that means he should just be handed a license though. Then again, I dont know that means he shouldnt either
Perhaps it just means i wouldnt hire him to be my architect
I've been working in and around architecture for 30 years. I've worked for architects, engineers, contractors, developers and fabricators. For the last 10 years I've been happily doing exempt work in my own practice.
When I decided last year to pursue my license after all this time, I thought, no problem, right? Sure I'd have to pass the tests which is no easy task but definitely doable. But because it's been longer that six months since I've worked directly for a licensed professional, NCARB won't let me count any of my experience. At this point in the process I have to do all 5.2 million hours of IDP in order to get licensed! I would have to leave my practice and become an employee again to gain most of those hours.
I may be stupid but I've decided that somehow I'm going to make it work. I'm just hoping that NCARB will make some changes to this ridiculous rule. Not holding my breath.
For now I think I'll change my username to "the oldest interm".
Did you hear about the 6 month rule coming (they wouldnt shut up about it for a long time it seemed) and not want to get your license, and only then, after it was in place, change your mind to get it?
I dont know if, in your situation, I would do the same, but good luck!
IDP thread! it's been a while... maybe this is a good sign.
Part of being a professional is discipline and punctuality. If you can't stay on top of your NCARB record (which is relatively easy) you're going to be sunk when you start having some real responsibilities.
I think the OP is concerned with a few months of temp work here and there being invalidated - not about punctuality of submitting paperwork. I remember being very disappointed when none of my construction experience counted because I never had a 6 month stretch of continuous full-time employment. It especially sucks now when most of the work available to recent grads is temp/contract work that lasts maybe a month or two.
I think there are ways you can count some of it if you somehow get a "supervisor" but my attempts several years ago at just finding a mentor through the local chapter of the AIA was a huge bust.
i find it interesting that many here who defend ncarb have never had to go through the current process. having been through it, it's a mess what with six month rules, hourly tracking of overly prescriptive areas of practice, convoluted mentorship/supervisor relationships, seven $210 tests, a total testing time of 28 hours, are cad programs that test your ability to use flawed software rather than knowledge pertinent to the practice of architecture, etc., but by the time you are finished with it, you are so glad to be finished that any desire to change this highly flawed system has been left behind to undertake the next phase of your career.
"I think the OP is concerned with a few months of temp work here and there being invalidated - not about punctuality of submitting paperwork."
toaster - perhaps you are right - the language can be construed either way. If I'm mistaken then I apologize, and commiserate over the unintended consequences arising from this brutal employment market.
the six-month rule forces interns to work under the consistent direct control of supervisors for the entire duration of the idp period. some may see that as a good thing in that they learn the ropes of the profession, but it has the unintended consequence of making them (even more) indebted to employers than they already are. goodbye salary bargaining power and professional independence.
it probably doesn't make that much difference for your average 23-yr. old right out of school, who would be in the same situation regardless. I finished architecture school in my late 20s, and already had a background in related fields. i was able to use this experience to argue for higher pay and more independence and get my idp hours retroactively later.
having to do idp the 'new' way would have really undermined my efforts, as it would have been really hard to pass myself off as someone with experience AND have to check in with those stupid forms every few months...
I've grown to believe that experience under a mentor is the most vital credential for being a professional architect (above school and the ARE exams). I understand no one likes bureaucracy, but I can't knock NCARB for trying to legitimize this process. Also, people who had any stake in the 6 month rule affecting their eligibility would have to have done something about it 2 years in advance. If you missed the cutoff with that much notice, there's really no one else to blame.
"I've grown to believe that experience under a mentor is the most vital credential for being a professional architect"
And you will get that mentor experience through your immediate supervisors, coworkers, consultants and specialists, construction manager who only calls you to yell and hang up, etc... It's called professional development, and you have to be asleep not to absorb most of it.
Not sure what exact problem this change of rule was supposed to address. Were the new licensees circa 2005 proving themselves incompetent?
A system this inflexible appears to be out there to punish all but the tamest of office drones.
elinor and fuzzy62 bring up very valid points on how adventure minded are penalized.
I really appreciate all of the comments thus far. I think it has sparked some interesting discussion and many have been responded very well. I have to say that rustystuds’s last post really hit the nail on the head for me, but I know that there must be thousands of other stories out there.
Yes, everyone is at a different point in his/her career, which is part of my issue with this rule. I was told by an NCARB official that he has heard stories of people who have been practicing for 10, 15, even 25 years and have to reevaluate their professional careers because they want or need to get licensed to continue their careers. As ozzie62 put it, “I would have to leave my practice and become an employee again to gain most of those hours.” It is statements like that that are cause for me to take this issue quite seriously and would like others to consider it seriously too.
The crux of my issue is the perceived legitimacy given to this system. In essence, reporting it makes it “real.” That is in the same way a LEED certification makes a building sustainable. It must not be if it isn’t LEED and I must not be experienced if I don’t report to the NCARB. It is part of an overly clerical system that makes us have to file more paperwork, dot more Is and cross more Ts. It would be one thing if the system were actually systematic. That is to say, it could be structured in a more streamline way, where all parties would be accountable (and accounted for) as they progress, not just because they are reporting to a national system. I think the electronic reporting system is a great step forward, but I would hope that our profession would be more innovative in the way they address complicated, multivariable systems—instead of standing so firmly behind bureaucratic rules and overly specific training categories.
It would also be great if employers were willing to set time aside to focus on professional development, if they want to abide by the current guidelines. However, “getting the drawings out,” does always seem to be the top priority. As an aside, I was once told it isn’t always beneficial to have more architects on staff because the firm’s insurance will go up. What a conflict of interest between firms and emerging architects?
Also, in the event that any of my coworkers or former classmates ever faces a difficult problem I won’t feel the need to say “Hey, I see you out there struggling, it’s your fault.” That’s just kicking someone when he is down. The recession and other socioeconomic events have been cause for many businesses and governing bodies to reevaluate their accounting principles. If the agency of an organization isn’t working for us, then why are we subscribing to it?
Is it because a room of 50 established members of the community were elected to speak for us? Sounds very congressional. And what if I don’t like how I am being governed or the practices of the governing body? Should I get out or should I try bring attention to the issues?
Maybe we could stand to elevate our profession beyond that of a bureaucracy.
I think there is a fine line between the system being too regulated and not regulated enough
Expecting firms to place a priority to develop their interns is one thing, having regulations where it is somehow to be given a priority as high as doing their actual business is a bit unrealistic and not necessary actually.
Is part of the problem that you feel the required hours and categories are not really relevant to actually learning the profession? My IDP has been done for almost 2 years, so i am a bit fuzzy on what was required, but i thought i remember it being pretty vague, which allowed me to fit actual work experience in where it belonged.
I essentially worked on one very large project from early schematic design all the way through the end of construction, which was about 4 years start to finish (very very long). This allowed me to fulfill i would say 75-85% of my required hours.
I guess i just dont fully understand why its hard to fill the hours if you are working, though i admittedly have worked in a place that has done a very nice job of getting younger workers varied experience.
The paperwork always just seemed like just paperwork, not anything unjust
the six-month rule forces interns to work under the consistent direct control of supervisors for the entire duration of the idp period.
Is this under the direct supervision of ONE supervisor (i.e., the same job) for the entire 3 years? That doesn't seem right, or possible
I thought the 6-month rule meant you had to report every six months minimum. Does it also/instead mean if you work somewhere less than 6 months you can't claim those hours?
Yeah, I thought it just meant you had to report everything within 6 months. It keeps folks on track. If it means the other, then we are all screwed. I got my hours in before the rule came into effect so that I wouldn't lose them. I then lost my job, and have been unemployed for nearly 3 years now. i'm just hoping they keep my record open.
I guess i just dont fully understand why its hard to fill the hours if you are working, though i admittedly have worked in a place that has done a very nice job of getting younger workers varied experience.
took me 5 years before I even saw a single project go to construction... and it's not that I didn't try to get this experience, I was just unlucky.
I also somehow managed to complete the CA section without having done a single punchlist (or knowing what a punchlist was). one boss once told me that picking up redlines on a bid-set counted towards "bidding and negotiation."
"took me 5 years before I even saw a single project go to construction... and it's not that I didn't try to get this experience, I was just unlucky."
yeah that does seem to happen a fair amount, along with getting pigeon holed into a specific task like rendering. 5 years with no opportunity at all to ever see a construction site though does seem to be an extreme exception. I would imagine most of the time, if you have some decent architects in your firm who have at least a mild interest in helping along younger employees, and you make it known, you can at least tag along occassionally to construction sites or job meetings.
"I also somehow managed to complete the CA section without having done a single punchlist (or knowing what a punchlist was). one boss once told me that picking up redlines on a bid-set counted towards "bidding and negotiation.""
this seems to come down to having a decent architect who you work with who will guide you at least partially in getting some exposure to different aspects of the job. It definitely is not everywhere by any means at all.
It also comes down to the intern marking his hours honestly. There is almost an endless list of tasks that you would ideally get exposure to, and NCARB cant have a required number of hours for each one. It's an intern's responsibility to keep track of everything they are and want to be exposed to, and a firm's responsibility to aid as much as they can. It's definitely a 2 way street, and can work very easily in a booming economy when there is tons of work. In a bad economy, its hard to blame anyone for doing anything they can to stay in business and keep their job. As an intern, i would take any work i can get and if i were a principal, my priority would be staying in business first and worrying about cultivating an intern's experience a distant second.
That said, even in a tough economy, if an intern is well prepared and organized and sits down with his boss asking for exposure to specific tasks, and keeps reminding them every now and then, one would hope the boss is decent enough to at least do what they can. Sure, it might take a couple months before the opportunity arose, but as long as the communication is open and consistent, a boss should be able to do something.
Now of course it doesnt always work out that way unfortunately
-if you work for a desiign firm that does large-scale projects, you probably will never do your own cds.
-if you work for a large corporate firm, you could be there for 10 years before they even let you near their contracts/bidding documents.
-your former classmate who has worked on kitchen/bathroom renovations for 3 years will get all these credits before you, even though the most complex thing he's ever worked out is millwork. (in nyc, it's perfectly possible for someone to work for years and never do a freestanding building.)
-there's absolutely nothing that compels an employer to sign off on your hours. i've seen several occasions where employers have refused, once because filling out forms was just too much hassle.
marmkid - not to hijack this thread even further, but I did tag along to job sites numerous times during that period. It wasn't until I experienced being fully involved during construction did things finally begin to make sense. There's a huge difference between tagging along every once and a while and actively participating in CA, IMO. I could have stopped by a random building under construction around the corner from my apartment, bugged the subs on site that day, and would have learned just as much as on those paid site visits.
It was more this constantly being shuffled around onto different projects and being exposed to random things without any context that stifled my professional development in those early years. I think most people understand being pulled occasionally to help out on things, but you don't really learn enough to start managing anything or take on more responsibility if you're constantly working on bits and pieces of a different project every couple weeks.
I think when young people complain about lack of professional development they're very likely working in this kind of inconsistent environment. being moved around is fine when someone is just starting out so they can get used to doing the work, but after a few months you'd expect to be part of at least one project team (and of course you'd let it be known, in a professional manner). My first employer was pretty good about about this, but when I moved to a different city for my wife's grad school I worked for a string of offices where not even a PM would stay on the same project from beginning to end.
IDP can be annoying, but I think all interns really have to figure out if they've done all they can to make sure they're moving forward - which can be tough if you don't really know exactly what you're supposed to be learning (ARE study materials were more helpful to me than that stupid IDP book). if you're in a bad environment with a bunch of assholes, there's really nothing invoking IDP/NCARB can do to fix things - but my rule of thumb is that if you're still getting tossed around after 6 months, you'd want to try to change things as soon as you can.
"There's a huge difference between tagging along every once and a while and actively participating in CA, IMO."
Oh i agree completely. But if you arent even able to tag along every once in a while and also have no chance to actively participate in CA, that would be even worse.
And perhaps if you are tagging along every once in a while, after a couple of times of that, you may be thought of to help out with actual CA work.
My point was only that it is better than nothing at all, and that you will not just be put on projects that will automatically fill all your IDP requirements, you have to actively take a part in what you work on, to the extent possible.
"if you're in a bad environment with a bunch of assholes, there's really nothing invoking IDP/NCARB can do to fix things - but my rule of thumb is that if you're still getting tossed around after 6 months, you'd want to try to change things as soon as you can."
I think this is very true. If you are in a good work environment for an intern, filling out your IDP is simple, as people work with you and you get exposed to all parts of the job preferably staying on the same project from start to finish.
If you are in a crappy situation, stuck doing the same thing over and over again and then realize your IDP hours arent being filled despite having a steady job, well, thats not really IDP or NCARB's fault, and there doesnt need to be legislation forcing jerk architects to make sure their employees are getting spread out over all the hours they need. If nothing else, it will just make them bigger jerks. Those are situations where you just need to find a new job
If anybody here thinks that IDP will make you a better more qualified architect, you are full of crap. IDP is a business, a scam, another organization that works for the betterment of the AIA and any business corporation associated with the AIA.
Just look at me, fresh out of school in california in 2001 I took all the exams and pass them all with zero, none whatsoever work experience. IDP is a BIG SCAM, keep believing NCARB and the AIA are your best friends, looking for your best interests.
Does anybody know here how much each of the senior or personal that works for ncarb make? And you do you know they are best buddies with the AIA. Do your research plz. If you want to give your money to ncarb and aia, is fine, but don't come here preaching and tell everyone that NCARB or the AIA makes you a better or more qualified architect, is just a bunch of load of crap.
They don't. Only you make yourself a better/good architect, but if you want to be a legal architect, you have to deal with NCARB. AIA is totally a matter of personal choice, but NCARB is, for now, the law.
despite the occasional rant about how NCARB is the devil and completely evil and blah blah blah, I would say 99% of the people out there actually understand the situation
NCARB and IDP are not perfect by any means, but they are the current route to getting the license. If you want a license, you have to deal with them.
If you have it in your head that NCARB is out just to screw you over and steal your money, then dont deal with them and dont get your license.
Having your license means squat if you cant actually do your job, and you will be exposed really really quick if you are one of those architects who think they are the best because they are licensed.
It's the same with LEED. It means squat if you dont know what you are doing. If you know anything about sustainable design, then you know that LEED is basically just a marketing tool. It has its purposes and uses, and it has its flaws.
Same with your license. If you just get your license and expect everyone to start handing you your dream job and projects to run, you are an idiot and will most likely end up online ranting about getting scammed.
But if you use your license as a tool, it can help further your career.
of course ncarb is out to screw us over and steal our money! it is an opportunistic 'nonprofit corporation' that stepped in to fill a convenient void in services...each state used to have its own employees that would administer the licensing process, at a time when 'big government' became a really bad word and states were looking for services/jobs to cut. so here comes ncarb and offers to 'streamline' the process for them...and surely they are getting money from the states to do this. PLUS they are allowed to charge architects fees, so they're basically milking both sides. and they face no competition because they have this special deal to provide what are basically government services.
as far as i understand it, it's like the student loan companies that service federal student loans. it costs those companies WAY more to service loans than it would if the fed. govt. were to offer those loans directly, because everyone's skimming off the public funds that NEVER STOP coming. Then they charge you again in fees. So basically you, as a public citizen, may be paying them more than once.
...and being a nonprofit of course doesn't mean that they can't pay their boards exorbitant salaries.
I never said you didnt, I was merely suggesting that as an option considering how much it appears to bother you
I am not offended at all, I just dont agree that there are so many people and organizations out there trying to screw me over and steal my money in the same way that you do
I would love to hear the steps you have taken to help bring about change with NCARB and IDP as well as with student loans, as it can be very informative to the discussion, perhaps for others who would like to either help out or see change in the system.
Are you serious? It's like being told to leave your country if you don't approve the direction of its government. Counterproductive stance at best, extremely damaging at worst.
elinor brings up a very valid argument about lack of accountability of a private organization to its current and potential members.
"perhaps taking your complaints to the actual source rather than random websites might actually contribute to a change?"
Posting the issue in a forum visited by industry members has many benefits. Getting a consensus on an issue can then lead to a more focused action. Refer to current state of middle east for example of power of organizing on the internets.
"or are you only interested in ranting online and waiting for someone else to fix your problems for you?"
lovely response. so ranting online over things you dont like and then when someone doesnt agree with you, you curse at them
I hardly find this comparable to the middle east as well, and actually a bit insulting to that actual situation going on. But if you find the 2 situations comparable, that is fine
And if everyone who has been ranting has been trying to work through NCARB and IDP and has just been completely rejected at every turn, that would be one thing. I highly doubt that is the case, but would love to be proved wrong.
and why should we defend ourselves to you? you make baseless accusations that we 'do nothing but rant' then you demand we prove them wrong? haha...no thanks.
there are many examples all over archinect, areforum, etc. about ncarb practices that would just be poor business practice in the *real world*
ncarb's primary mission is to keep itself alive and relevant. it will continue to institute programs and policies that ensure you keep having to pay them fees, while offering substandard services. if you don't mind doing this, then fine. but what gives you the right to try to stop the rest of us from discussing/complaining/airing our grievances or setting conditions for how and why we should be able to do so?
elinor keeps taking words out of my mouth, so I'm stuck with the leftovers. Mostly naughty things.
mermkid, telling you to fuck off seems to be the most appropriate responso to your circular logic. And it has nothing to do with topic at hand. You're 'that' guy.
Sent to me from a friend, who could not post without joining:
Wow! I take encouragement from some of them! Some of the others seem to be very callous to the rather brutal nature of the changes. It seems to me that there was a need to change the system. Well, fine – change the system. But don’t invalidate everything done prior! Everyone has heard the term “grandfathered in” – especially architects – TONS of buildings built prior to ADA regulations, for example, were grandfathered in, despite the fact that they BROKE the rules, because they were already in existence and it would have been cost-prohibitive (not to mention completely impossible & ludicrous) to have altered all these buildings to meet current codes. But what does that really mean? It wouldn’t have been cost-prohibitive to me. Same situation here: “oh – you’re getting f***ed by the rules? Gosh, that sucks. & you’re losing how much time and money? Gosh, double sucks. But triple suck it up & incur the time and monetary expenses – I’m really not affected by the change, so why would I care?”
I’m really glad you posted it though! Keep discussing it – maybe set up a separate discussion board or blog & direct people to use it as a forum. DO NOT let this become too stale without propositioning some of them to take action with you…
in a thread where an actual discussion was going on, you then simply "rant" (which is all you did despite your vague hints that you have perhaps done more), and the end it by saying "fuck off"
Perhaps not everyone wants to just listen to someone bitch about things derailing an actual discussion?
Perhaps actual solutions would like to be discussed? Especially when you claim to have tried to fix the problem
Fill us in on what you have tried.
Architects tend to do everything on their own, no one works together.
and elinor, no one has stopped you from doing anything, lets cut the dramatics. I simply questioned you. If you just insist on everyone only reading your posts and only commenting when we agree, then that isnt really the purpose of this site
so because i dont agree with you and dont agree that NCARB and IDP is solely out there to scam us all and screw us over, rather than discuss, you just tell me to leave
continue complaining about everything and doing nothing then, since that is all i can assume since you refuse to say anything else
Let me know if you ever would like to discuss the pros and cons of the system like we were previously prior to this tangent
ryhane, i made the cutoff and got licensed last year, but i think think tightening up the process even more makes things unnecessarily difficult not just for people like you, but for anyone starting out. the problem is that so much depends on employers being responsible for your development, and so often this doesn't happen as it should. and the intern has no recourse in the matter.
idp in general privileges certain kinds of experience, namely working for a small to mid-sized firm where there is close supervision and mentorship. it screws over a lot of people whose work environment doesn't fit that description.
And if everyone who has been ranting has been trying to work through NCARB and IDP and has just been completely rejected at every turn, that would be one thing. I highly doubt that is the case, but would love to be proved wrong.
Assuredly, I have been rejected at every turn and at every level of the system (at least in trying to claim my hours). I only started this thread to see if others were having similar issues. It seems that they are and with enough participation, people can start to make their voices heard. Discussing it here is no different than discussing any conflict over the Internet, despite the magnitude of the conflict. Obviously, some people see some injustice and want to discuss it. We are free to do so; so we are. Even opposing voices are welcome to be heard, but don’t let this become a battle of wits. I don’t want the tone of this conversation to take one of bickering, riddled with salvos begotten by the “anonymity” of the Internet. Although it is probably futile to make this request, I would encourage those of you who don’t have anything to gain from this discussion to find a different forum for your thoughts, opinions and other contributions. I think those of us who feel we do have something to gain should band together. How can we become allies for each other?
IDP / NCARB six-month rule got you down?
I am trying to gauge how many people are currently having some of their experience invalidated by the NCARB, because of the six-month rule? How can this mandate effect so many people and continue to operate unchecked? Personally, I see it as a scheme to keep people as interns for longer and longer. Why is the door closing on our profession? Getting experience and trying to get licensed is incredibly frustrating, especially if you feel like you’ve already earned it!
I agree. It's a way of slowing down the process. Though I don't think I've already earned it, especially when I study for the exams. Then I realize that I have much to learn and I'm glad the stamps aren't given away so easily. There would be a lot of unqualified architects running around. But the six month rule and the easy possibility of losing experience if you don't keep up with your record is complete bs.
Part of being a professional is discipline and punctuality. If you can't stay on top of your NCARB record (which is relatively easy) you're going to be sunk when you start having some real responsibilities.
how exactly does the 6 month rule increase the possibility of losing experience?
If there wasnt the 6 month rule, i bet 95% of the interns would not do their hours until they thought they were complete, and then they would scramble to get 3-4 years of hours signed off on all at once, probably from old employers
then they would complain when they are all not accepted instantly
It actually makes getting your hours accepted easier, and basically, you have to fill out something online, what, twice a year?
NCARB doesnt have a lot of things right, that is definitely true. But the 6 month rule along with the online submission is something that is a step in the right direction
And really, if you cant remember to get your hours signed off every 6 months, you deserve to lose that time
From FAQ:
When was the Six-Month Rule voted on?
At the Annual Meeting in June 2008, NCARB’s Member Boards voted 49-1 in favor of implementing Resolution 2008-07 aka the Six-Month Rule.
Ah, June of '08. Everyone in the profession is gainfully employed. Decent salaries, plenty of work. Real-estate can only go up-up-up! Get a loan and get in on the action!
By 2011 we'll all be brazillionaires.
I want to find out who dat one dark cloud who voted no is. This recession is all his/her fault.
still funny how you can take the exams and pass them but not get licensed because you didn't have the idp hours, seriously...... this is one reason why i think idp is bullshit........but hey, i know folks with builders license's that are making moves and designing/building smaller scale projects......think about that....
i think the point behind that is that there is more to being an architect than just being able to pass a couple of exams
now whether or not the arbitrary number of hours that IDP requires is relevant.....thats another question
some kid out of school who happens to be a good test taker could study a bit and pass the exams. I dont know if that means he should just be handed a license though. Then again, I dont know that means he shouldnt either
Perhaps it just means i wouldnt hire him to be my architect
The six month rule is killing me.
I've been working in and around architecture for 30 years. I've worked for architects, engineers, contractors, developers and fabricators. For the last 10 years I've been happily doing exempt work in my own practice.
When I decided last year to pursue my license after all this time, I thought, no problem, right? Sure I'd have to pass the tests which is no easy task but definitely doable. But because it's been longer that six months since I've worked directly for a licensed professional, NCARB won't let me count any of my experience. At this point in the process I have to do all 5.2 million hours of IDP in order to get licensed! I would have to leave my practice and become an employee again to gain most of those hours.
I may be stupid but I've decided that somehow I'm going to make it work. I'm just hoping that NCARB will make some changes to this ridiculous rule. Not holding my breath.
For now I think I'll change my username to "the oldest interm".
Did you hear about the 6 month rule coming (they wouldnt shut up about it for a long time it seemed) and not want to get your license, and only then, after it was in place, change your mind to get it?
I dont know if, in your situation, I would do the same, but good luck!
IDP thread! it's been a while... maybe this is a good sign.
Part of being a professional is discipline and punctuality. If you can't stay on top of your NCARB record (which is relatively easy) you're going to be sunk when you start having some real responsibilities.
I think the OP is concerned with a few months of temp work here and there being invalidated - not about punctuality of submitting paperwork. I remember being very disappointed when none of my construction experience counted because I never had a 6 month stretch of continuous full-time employment. It especially sucks now when most of the work available to recent grads is temp/contract work that lasts maybe a month or two.
I think there are ways you can count some of it if you somehow get a "supervisor" but my attempts several years ago at just finding a mentor through the local chapter of the AIA was a huge bust.
i find it interesting that many here who defend ncarb have never had to go through the current process. having been through it, it's a mess what with six month rules, hourly tracking of overly prescriptive areas of practice, convoluted mentorship/supervisor relationships, seven $210 tests, a total testing time of 28 hours, are cad programs that test your ability to use flawed software rather than knowledge pertinent to the practice of architecture, etc., but by the time you are finished with it, you are so glad to be finished that any desire to change this highly flawed system has been left behind to undertake the next phase of your career.
what he said
i am currently 4 done out of the 7 exams and completely agree with the flaws associated with them
it is quite maddening at times
toaster - perhaps you are right - the language can be construed either way. If I'm mistaken then I apologize, and commiserate over the unintended consequences arising from this brutal employment market.
the six-month rule forces interns to work under the consistent direct control of supervisors for the entire duration of the idp period. some may see that as a good thing in that they learn the ropes of the profession, but it has the unintended consequence of making them (even more) indebted to employers than they already are. goodbye salary bargaining power and professional independence.
it probably doesn't make that much difference for your average 23-yr. old right out of school, who would be in the same situation regardless. I finished architecture school in my late 20s, and already had a background in related fields. i was able to use this experience to argue for higher pay and more independence and get my idp hours retroactively later.
having to do idp the 'new' way would have really undermined my efforts, as it would have been really hard to pass myself off as someone with experience AND have to check in with those stupid forms every few months...
I've grown to believe that experience under a mentor is the most vital credential for being a professional architect (above school and the ARE exams). I understand no one likes bureaucracy, but I can't knock NCARB for trying to legitimize this process. Also, people who had any stake in the 6 month rule affecting their eligibility would have to have done something about it 2 years in advance. If you missed the cutoff with that much notice, there's really no one else to blame.
And you will get that mentor experience through your immediate supervisors, coworkers, consultants and specialists, construction manager who only calls you to yell and hang up, etc... It's called professional development, and you have to be asleep not to absorb most of it.
Not sure what exact problem this change of rule was supposed to address. Were the new licensees circa 2005 proving themselves incompetent?
A system this inflexible appears to be out there to punish all but the tamest of office drones.
elinor and fuzzy62 bring up very valid points on how adventure minded are penalized.
I really appreciate all of the comments thus far. I think it has sparked some interesting discussion and many have been responded very well. I have to say that rustystuds’s last post really hit the nail on the head for me, but I know that there must be thousands of other stories out there.
Yes, everyone is at a different point in his/her career, which is part of my issue with this rule. I was told by an NCARB official that he has heard stories of people who have been practicing for 10, 15, even 25 years and have to reevaluate their professional careers because they want or need to get licensed to continue their careers. As ozzie62 put it, “I would have to leave my practice and become an employee again to gain most of those hours.” It is statements like that that are cause for me to take this issue quite seriously and would like others to consider it seriously too.
The crux of my issue is the perceived legitimacy given to this system. In essence, reporting it makes it “real.” That is in the same way a LEED certification makes a building sustainable. It must not be if it isn’t LEED and I must not be experienced if I don’t report to the NCARB. It is part of an overly clerical system that makes us have to file more paperwork, dot more Is and cross more Ts. It would be one thing if the system were actually systematic. That is to say, it could be structured in a more streamline way, where all parties would be accountable (and accounted for) as they progress, not just because they are reporting to a national system. I think the electronic reporting system is a great step forward, but I would hope that our profession would be more innovative in the way they address complicated, multivariable systems—instead of standing so firmly behind bureaucratic rules and overly specific training categories.
It would also be great if employers were willing to set time aside to focus on professional development, if they want to abide by the current guidelines. However, “getting the drawings out,” does always seem to be the top priority. As an aside, I was once told it isn’t always beneficial to have more architects on staff because the firm’s insurance will go up. What a conflict of interest between firms and emerging architects?
Also, in the event that any of my coworkers or former classmates ever faces a difficult problem I won’t feel the need to say “Hey, I see you out there struggling, it’s your fault.” That’s just kicking someone when he is down. The recession and other socioeconomic events have been cause for many businesses and governing bodies to reevaluate their accounting principles. If the agency of an organization isn’t working for us, then why are we subscribing to it?
Is it because a room of 50 established members of the community were elected to speak for us? Sounds very congressional. And what if I don’t like how I am being governed or the practices of the governing body? Should I get out or should I try bring attention to the issues?
Maybe we could stand to elevate our profession beyond that of a bureaucracy.
I think there is a fine line between the system being too regulated and not regulated enough
Expecting firms to place a priority to develop their interns is one thing, having regulations where it is somehow to be given a priority as high as doing their actual business is a bit unrealistic and not necessary actually.
Is part of the problem that you feel the required hours and categories are not really relevant to actually learning the profession? My IDP has been done for almost 2 years, so i am a bit fuzzy on what was required, but i thought i remember it being pretty vague, which allowed me to fit actual work experience in where it belonged.
I essentially worked on one very large project from early schematic design all the way through the end of construction, which was about 4 years start to finish (very very long). This allowed me to fulfill i would say 75-85% of my required hours.
I guess i just dont fully understand why its hard to fill the hours if you are working, though i admittedly have worked in a place that has done a very nice job of getting younger workers varied experience.
The paperwork always just seemed like just paperwork, not anything unjust
Is this under the direct supervision of ONE supervisor (i.e., the same job) for the entire 3 years? That doesn't seem right, or possible
I thought the 6-month rule meant you had to report every six months minimum. Does it also/instead mean if you work somewhere less than 6 months you can't claim those hours?
Yeah, I thought it just meant you had to report everything within 6 months. It keeps folks on track. If it means the other, then we are all screwed. I got my hours in before the rule came into effect so that I wouldn't lose them. I then lost my job, and have been unemployed for nearly 3 years now. i'm just hoping they keep my record open.
Donna, get back to work!
took me 5 years before I even saw a single project go to construction... and it's not that I didn't try to get this experience, I was just unlucky.
I also somehow managed to complete the CA section without having done a single punchlist (or knowing what a punchlist was). one boss once told me that picking up redlines on a bid-set counted towards "bidding and negotiation."
"took me 5 years before I even saw a single project go to construction... and it's not that I didn't try to get this experience, I was just unlucky."
yeah that does seem to happen a fair amount, along with getting pigeon holed into a specific task like rendering. 5 years with no opportunity at all to ever see a construction site though does seem to be an extreme exception. I would imagine most of the time, if you have some decent architects in your firm who have at least a mild interest in helping along younger employees, and you make it known, you can at least tag along occassionally to construction sites or job meetings.
"I also somehow managed to complete the CA section without having done a single punchlist (or knowing what a punchlist was). one boss once told me that picking up redlines on a bid-set counted towards "bidding and negotiation.""
this seems to come down to having a decent architect who you work with who will guide you at least partially in getting some exposure to different aspects of the job. It definitely is not everywhere by any means at all.
It also comes down to the intern marking his hours honestly. There is almost an endless list of tasks that you would ideally get exposure to, and NCARB cant have a required number of hours for each one. It's an intern's responsibility to keep track of everything they are and want to be exposed to, and a firm's responsibility to aid as much as they can. It's definitely a 2 way street, and can work very easily in a booming economy when there is tons of work. In a bad economy, its hard to blame anyone for doing anything they can to stay in business and keep their job. As an intern, i would take any work i can get and if i were a principal, my priority would be staying in business first and worrying about cultivating an intern's experience a distant second.
That said, even in a tough economy, if an intern is well prepared and organized and sits down with his boss asking for exposure to specific tasks, and keeps reminding them every now and then, one would hope the boss is decent enough to at least do what they can. Sure, it might take a couple months before the opportunity arose, but as long as the communication is open and consistent, a boss should be able to do something.
Now of course it doesnt always work out that way unfortunately
a few more reason why idp is a crock--
-if you work for a desiign firm that does large-scale projects, you probably will never do your own cds.
-if you work for a large corporate firm, you could be there for 10 years before they even let you near their contracts/bidding documents.
-your former classmate who has worked on kitchen/bathroom renovations for 3 years will get all these credits before you, even though the most complex thing he's ever worked out is millwork. (in nyc, it's perfectly possible for someone to work for years and never do a freestanding building.)
-there's absolutely nothing that compels an employer to sign off on your hours. i've seen several occasions where employers have refused, once because filling out forms was just too much hassle.
*reasons*
marmkid - not to hijack this thread even further, but I did tag along to job sites numerous times during that period. It wasn't until I experienced being fully involved during construction did things finally begin to make sense. There's a huge difference between tagging along every once and a while and actively participating in CA, IMO. I could have stopped by a random building under construction around the corner from my apartment, bugged the subs on site that day, and would have learned just as much as on those paid site visits.
It was more this constantly being shuffled around onto different projects and being exposed to random things without any context that stifled my professional development in those early years. I think most people understand being pulled occasionally to help out on things, but you don't really learn enough to start managing anything or take on more responsibility if you're constantly working on bits and pieces of a different project every couple weeks.
I think when young people complain about lack of professional development they're very likely working in this kind of inconsistent environment. being moved around is fine when someone is just starting out so they can get used to doing the work, but after a few months you'd expect to be part of at least one project team (and of course you'd let it be known, in a professional manner). My first employer was pretty good about about this, but when I moved to a different city for my wife's grad school I worked for a string of offices where not even a PM would stay on the same project from beginning to end.
IDP can be annoying, but I think all interns really have to figure out if they've done all they can to make sure they're moving forward - which can be tough if you don't really know exactly what you're supposed to be learning (ARE study materials were more helpful to me than that stupid IDP book). if you're in a bad environment with a bunch of assholes, there's really nothing invoking IDP/NCARB can do to fix things - but my rule of thumb is that if you're still getting tossed around after 6 months, you'd want to try to change things as soon as you can.
"There's a huge difference between tagging along every once and a while and actively participating in CA, IMO."
Oh i agree completely. But if you arent even able to tag along every once in a while and also have no chance to actively participate in CA, that would be even worse.
And perhaps if you are tagging along every once in a while, after a couple of times of that, you may be thought of to help out with actual CA work.
My point was only that it is better than nothing at all, and that you will not just be put on projects that will automatically fill all your IDP requirements, you have to actively take a part in what you work on, to the extent possible.
"if you're in a bad environment with a bunch of assholes, there's really nothing invoking IDP/NCARB can do to fix things - but my rule of thumb is that if you're still getting tossed around after 6 months, you'd want to try to change things as soon as you can."
I think this is very true. If you are in a good work environment for an intern, filling out your IDP is simple, as people work with you and you get exposed to all parts of the job preferably staying on the same project from start to finish.
If you are in a crappy situation, stuck doing the same thing over and over again and then realize your IDP hours arent being filled despite having a steady job, well, thats not really IDP or NCARB's fault, and there doesnt need to be legislation forcing jerk architects to make sure their employees are getting spread out over all the hours they need. If nothing else, it will just make them bigger jerks. Those are situations where you just need to find a new job
If anybody here thinks that IDP will make you a better more qualified architect, you are full of crap. IDP is a business, a scam, another organization that works for the betterment of the AIA and any business corporation associated with the AIA.
Just look at me, fresh out of school in california in 2001 I took all the exams and pass them all with zero, none whatsoever work experience. IDP is a BIG SCAM, keep believing NCARB and the AIA are your best friends, looking for your best interests.
Does anybody know here how much each of the senior or personal that works for ncarb make? And you do you know they are best buddies with the AIA. Do your research plz. If you want to give your money to ncarb and aia, is fine, but don't come here preaching and tell everyone that NCARB or the AIA makes you a better or more qualified architect, is just a bunch of load of crap.
peace out.
ha.
who said that NCARB or the AIA makes you a better architect?
They don't. Only you make yourself a better/good architect, but if you want to be a legal architect, you have to deal with NCARB. AIA is totally a matter of personal choice, but NCARB is, for now, the law.
Who said that the AIA makes a dime off IDP?
It's my poor opinion that the AIA actually spends money to help NCARB develop qualifications.
despite the occasional rant about how NCARB is the devil and completely evil and blah blah blah, I would say 99% of the people out there actually understand the situation
NCARB and IDP are not perfect by any means, but they are the current route to getting the license. If you want a license, you have to deal with them.
If you have it in your head that NCARB is out just to screw you over and steal your money, then dont deal with them and dont get your license.
Having your license means squat if you cant actually do your job, and you will be exposed really really quick if you are one of those architects who think they are the best because they are licensed.
It's the same with LEED. It means squat if you dont know what you are doing. If you know anything about sustainable design, then you know that LEED is basically just a marketing tool. It has its purposes and uses, and it has its flaws.
Same with your license. If you just get your license and expect everyone to start handing you your dream job and projects to run, you are an idiot and will most likely end up online ranting about getting scammed.
But if you use your license as a tool, it can help further your career.
Come on. That's a flawed reasoning.
Why is that?
of course ncarb is out to screw us over and steal our money! it is an opportunistic 'nonprofit corporation' that stepped in to fill a convenient void in services...each state used to have its own employees that would administer the licensing process, at a time when 'big government' became a really bad word and states were looking for services/jobs to cut. so here comes ncarb and offers to 'streamline' the process for them...and surely they are getting money from the states to do this. PLUS they are allowed to charge architects fees, so they're basically milking both sides. and they face no competition because they have this special deal to provide what are basically government services.
as far as i understand it, it's like the student loan companies that service federal student loans. it costs those companies WAY more to service loans than it would if the fed. govt. were to offer those loans directly, because everyone's skimming off the public funds that NEVER STOP coming. Then they charge you again in fees. So basically you, as a public citizen, may be paying them more than once.
...and being a nonprofit of course doesn't mean that they can't pay their boards exorbitant salaries.
i love the tie in to student loans, it makes the crying have more of an impact to show how you have doubly been screwed over
perhaps taking your complaints to the actual source rather than random websites might actually contribute to a change?
or are you only interested in ranting online and waiting for someone else to fix your problems for you?
and how do you know i don't?
...but more importantly, why does it offend you so much if some of us prefer to challenge the status quo?
I never said you didnt, I was merely suggesting that as an option considering how much it appears to bother you
I am not offended at all, I just dont agree that there are so many people and organizations out there trying to screw me over and steal my money in the same way that you do
I would love to hear the steps you have taken to help bring about change with NCARB and IDP as well as with student loans, as it can be very informative to the discussion, perhaps for others who would like to either help out or see change in the system.
Are you serious? It's like being told to leave your country if you don't approve the direction of its government. Counterproductive stance at best, extremely damaging at worst.
elinor brings up a very valid argument about lack of accountability of a private organization to its current and potential members.
"perhaps taking your complaints to the actual source rather than random websites might actually contribute to a change?"
Posting the issue in a forum visited by industry members has many benefits. Getting a consensus on an issue can then lead to a more focused action. Refer to current state of middle east for example of power of organizing on the internets.
"or are you only interested in ranting online and waiting for someone else to fix your problems for you?"
oh, fuck off.
lovely response. so ranting online over things you dont like and then when someone doesnt agree with you, you curse at them
I hardly find this comparable to the middle east as well, and actually a bit insulting to that actual situation going on. But if you find the 2 situations comparable, that is fine
And if everyone who has been ranting has been trying to work through NCARB and IDP and has just been completely rejected at every turn, that would be one thing. I highly doubt that is the case, but would love to be proved wrong.
and why should we defend ourselves to you? you make baseless accusations that we 'do nothing but rant' then you demand we prove them wrong? haha...no thanks.
there are many examples all over archinect, areforum, etc. about ncarb practices that would just be poor business practice in the *real world*
ncarb's primary mission is to keep itself alive and relevant. it will continue to institute programs and policies that ensure you keep having to pay them fees, while offering substandard services. if you don't mind doing this, then fine. but what gives you the right to try to stop the rest of us from discussing/complaining/airing our grievances or setting conditions for how and why we should be able to do so?
elinor keeps taking words out of my mouth, so I'm stuck with the leftovers. Mostly naughty things.
mermkid, telling you to fuck off seems to be the most appropriate responso to your circular logic. And it has nothing to do with topic at hand. You're 'that' guy.
Sent to me from a friend, who could not post without joining:
Wow! I take encouragement from some of them! Some of the others seem to be very callous to the rather brutal nature of the changes. It seems to me that there was a need to change the system. Well, fine – change the system. But don’t invalidate everything done prior! Everyone has heard the term “grandfathered in” – especially architects – TONS of buildings built prior to ADA regulations, for example, were grandfathered in, despite the fact that they BROKE the rules, because they were already in existence and it would have been cost-prohibitive (not to mention completely impossible & ludicrous) to have altered all these buildings to meet current codes. But what does that really mean? It wouldn’t have been cost-prohibitive to me. Same situation here: “oh – you’re getting f***ed by the rules? Gosh, that sucks. & you’re losing how much time and money? Gosh, double sucks. But triple suck it up & incur the time and monetary expenses – I’m really not affected by the change, so why would I care?”
I’m really glad you posted it though! Keep discussing it – maybe set up a separate discussion board or blog & direct people to use it as a forum. DO NOT let this become too stale without propositioning some of them to take action with you…
in a thread where an actual discussion was going on, you then simply "rant" (which is all you did despite your vague hints that you have perhaps done more), and the end it by saying "fuck off"
Perhaps not everyone wants to just listen to someone bitch about things derailing an actual discussion?
Perhaps actual solutions would like to be discussed? Especially when you claim to have tried to fix the problem
Fill us in on what you have tried.
Architects tend to do everything on their own, no one works together.
and elinor, no one has stopped you from doing anything, lets cut the dramatics. I simply questioned you. If you just insist on everyone only reading your posts and only commenting when we agree, then that isnt really the purpose of this site
now you're confusing two people. can this get any worse?
"I simply questioned you."
Glen Beck? Is that you? Shit.
You said that people who have issue with the registration process should not get registered. Thanks for such insight.
You should get a job busting unions.
"You said that people who have issue with the registration process should not get registered. Thanks for such insight. "
if someone cannot handle the process of registering their hours once every 6 months, then yes, my suggestion is to not get registered.
I am not the one complaining about everything. But again, I will ask you what steps have you taken to fix the process that you continue to criticize?
Or if you are simply here to complain and vent, then just admit it
if you care about the discussion so much, marmkid, do everyone a favor and back off.
so because i dont agree with you and dont agree that NCARB and IDP is solely out there to scam us all and screw us over, rather than discuss, you just tell me to leave
continue complaining about everything and doing nothing then, since that is all i can assume since you refuse to say anything else
Let me know if you ever would like to discuss the pros and cons of the system like we were previously prior to this tangent
ryhane, i made the cutoff and got licensed last year, but i think think tightening up the process even more makes things unnecessarily difficult not just for people like you, but for anyone starting out. the problem is that so much depends on employers being responsible for your development, and so often this doesn't happen as it should. and the intern has no recourse in the matter.
idp in general privileges certain kinds of experience, namely working for a small to mid-sized firm where there is close supervision and mentorship. it screws over a lot of people whose work environment doesn't fit that description.
We already established why this screws some people over. Please read the damn thread.
"Or if you are simply here to complain and vent, then just admit it"
I have NO idea who you are talking to anymore.
Mermkid, I hope one day, when you become a full grown mermaid, this thread makes a bit more sense to you.
And if everyone who has been ranting has been trying to work through NCARB and IDP and has just been completely rejected at every turn, that would be one thing. I highly doubt that is the case, but would love to be proved wrong.
Assuredly, I have been rejected at every turn and at every level of the system (at least in trying to claim my hours). I only started this thread to see if others were having similar issues. It seems that they are and with enough participation, people can start to make their voices heard. Discussing it here is no different than discussing any conflict over the Internet, despite the magnitude of the conflict. Obviously, some people see some injustice and want to discuss it. We are free to do so; so we are. Even opposing voices are welcome to be heard, but don’t let this become a battle of wits. I don’t want the tone of this conversation to take one of bickering, riddled with salvos begotten by the “anonymity” of the Internet. Although it is probably futile to make this request, I would encourage those of you who don’t have anything to gain from this discussion to find a different forum for your thoughts, opinions and other contributions. I think those of us who feel we do have something to gain should band together. How can we become allies for each other?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.