Donna, you're right about that legally and I wouldn't recommend calling yourself an architect if you haven't completed the requirements, but in truth, that's what a building designer is. But to go back to a pervious point, who cares what you are called if you know what you are?
If the AIA spent half the time simplifying codes and streamlining the permit process that they spend on these kind of questions, we might have a true vernacular architecture. As it is, the generic stuff that passes for architecture is so devoid of anything wonderful, it's no wonder our advanced civilization has such a pathetic built legacy.
The existing over beaurocratized system produces the kind of professional bifurcation that Steven Ward talks about. I'm a staunch pro-government liberal, but there is way too much regulation for my taste at the local level and not enough at the multi-national level. Then again, that's no surprise.
Wait. The AIA doesn't spend time on finding people who are illegally calling themselves architects, the state board does that.
The AIA is currently working with the associated organizations to simplify paths to licensure, to change the terminology away from "intern" to something that most likely includes the term architect, and to create academic programs that allow one to use the term upon graduation.
I feel I have to be a stickler about this because it's so easy to accuse the AIA of being a bunch of old white men who throw awards banquets for themselves. That attitude betrays a real ignorance of what the AIA is doing right now. If people would deign to be active in their AIAs they would see this for themselves and they could be part of the change.
(Locally, by the way, my AIA is working on streamlining the permit process. I can't speak for other local chapters on that front.)
I like the title Designer. NCARB does want you to use intern though, it is right in their literature.
As for the AIA, I think I discovered the reason I don't like them in the Let's Talk Money thread: in short they screwed up, got in legal hot water, took some bad advice and now everyone has to pay for it. And it is just a club. Archinect is a club too and the monetary dues are non-existent.
Haven't you ever thought it was funny that the ARE tests you on club documents? Never made sense to me that to get a license from a government agency, you have to regurgitate proprietary club documents. Contracts and agreements can take many forms, and we learn in spec writing for instance that specifying for performance (example: a generic owner-contract agreement) is different than a proprietary spec (A201), and that government is in fact sensitive to this (whereas private work isn't)! An architect I worked for advised me to take the ARE before I got "too smart". I think I may have missed my window? You have to take the ARE before you realize there is more than one way to skin a cat. Perhaps this is why many older interns never get licensed, they miss that window of naivety.
AIA docs are pretty common in the industry and can be useful
as far as 'club docs,' wouldn't you consider the ICC a club with a bunch of proprietary docs?
on a side note, ohio doesn't use the ICC. they developed their own code. which, as it turns out, is pretty close of the ICC docs (i haven't found where the difference is, but they said it is different). however, it seems municipal codes can be published online with free access, whereas apparently the ICC codes are stuck behind a pay gate. i always thought it was odd that the government made me follow laws that i couldn't access without paying a private organization a bunch of $$.
Seems like the problem recent grads have is meeting the internship requirements. I didn't but I work in a small firm, I could see how in a medium to large firm this would be a problem as often the firms have a CA department and the owners don't want the employees to have any idea whats going on on the money side(ie professional practice). Having taken 6 of 7 tests it seems they couldn't be passed without either having worked for a significant amount of time or spending a lot of time studying. Either way you've learned what the profession feels you should know if you can pass the tests so why not drop the intern requirements keep the tests. For fun add a verbal portion that is administered by other architects that when finished you enter an initiation ceremony like the free masons.
"AIA docs are pretty common in the industry and can be useful." Not that I want to add more words to ARE, the Q's could go something like this, "In an owner-contractor agreement, such as the AIA 201...."
And just because something is common, doesn't mean it should be accepted. The intent of the contracts should be studied, not the actual content, don't you think?
NCARB's use of the term intern is for literature sake. NCARB can really care less if you call yourself a designer or any unregulated title. Seriously, NCARB can careless. The use of the word intern is simply relating to the name of the IDP program and why the word 'intern' was chosen, one might look back to the beginning of IDP and the documents and discussions leading up to the IDP program coming to being.
I think the choice of intern is because the architectural community wanted to align the terminology closer to how the terms are used in medical and law professions which architects for a long time have wanted the public perception to be because apprentice is associated with construction trades which is seen as 'blue collar' hands oriented while interns is associated with "intellectual"-oriented fields.
I actually agree with Thayer-D's comments above. The impression that often comes out of those governing bodies seems to appear that they are ready to go after the ones using improper terminology in describing their credentials (which they should be doing) because it is an easy way to produce very tangible, indisputable results of their system and therefore confirm the need for their job. Nothing says "The system works!" quite like getting the white-collar bad guy. Yet, as TD points out, a lot of this time spend on debating the merits of a name could be spent on creating a system that is much easier to navigate. I'm only starting into my first couple forays in getting through redtape (mind you in Canada, not the US) and find myself shaking my head way too often. On top of that - I actually completed one of my academic co-ops working for a government PM agency, where it was even worse.
The point to be made is that, it is much easier to create singular, 'ah-ha' moments rather than trying to introduce systematic reform in a system that appears to badly need it, that would nullify the need to 'peacock' one-time accomplishments.
BenC, I don't disagree either - I was just trying to point at that I don't believe, and this is based on my experience within it, that the AIA is majorly at fault in this issue. The AIA is radically trying to reformat to serve its members better right now, and it's working with the associated entities (NCARB, ACSA, NAAB) in those efforts.
The next challenge will be bringing the individual state boards into the discussion, and I don't have any firsthand knowledge that this is happening yet.
Aug 8, 14 4:13 pm ·
·
Donna,
It is possible that in a way it is AIA's fault. AIA was key to creating the licensing boards. They wrote the Architect Acts that were legislated. They were involved in creating NCARB and NAAB and ACSA. Every single year of every single licensing board in the United States... a majority of the members are AIA members. A majority of them work to AIA's bidding. The majority of every single Bill to amend each state's licensing laws are drafted by AIA. AIA is its members and its members work in a sort of consorted effort. Of course, its membership changes and in effect, the legislation shifts. NCARB policies shifts. NAAB policy shifts. and so does ACSA.
Then again it can be said all these associated entities is really AIA behind the scenes because AIA ultimately runs the show of architectural licensing.
However, even then its water under the bridge. AIA today is not quite the same AIA was of 100 years ago, 50 years ago or even 30 years ago.
AIA motivated old policies that are now being changed.
My interest in this thread is mostly derived on what I should call my Intern, esp as he is gaining experience and responsibility, I am having him design projects, meet with owners, and giving him more control & responsibility. But I don't like introducing him as an Intern, as I feel the perception of "interns" has been ruined by popular culture, and the business world.
I don't like the "in training" because it seems made up.
I don't like "designer" because so many people who don't have a degree in architecture (or sometimes any degree) are calling themselves that, there should be something that separates him from someone who doesn't have that education.
I don't like project manager or project coordinator (although those were both titles I had before Licensure) because it implies that he is just pushing paper.
I have been using Apprentice Architect, going back to the days of old, and that is how I most accurately see our relationship. However, I am not sure I am able to allow him to use that term himself (on business cards, and as a sign off on his e-mails.).
I also take some offense to whoever keeps posting how easy arch school is/was, perhaps they just went to a bad school, or something, I know in my school less than half completed the program. Most were weeded out after the second year. while I may agree that you didn't necessarily need to be the smartest person to complete school, it was certainly a very time consuming and rigorous program, and yes people did fail out of the program, or were asked to leave. I know several people who transferred out of Architecture to Engineering and found it easier, or at least less time consuming & more predictable.
Jeremy, not to reopen the topic too much, but your perspective is pretty good. I think the most important issue mentioned in this thread (and the other dozen or so like it) is that many people do not find themselves under a specific "mentor" but more as one grunt in an office of many. From what I've seen, such an environment is not as fruitful to the development of fresh graduates and helps perpetuate the intern stereotype.
To your second point, I've claimed that architecture school is easier relative to Law or Medicine as that was where the discussion was heading. I personally have my master's from the top school in my country and worked just as long in studio as anyone else all while working part-time in a real architecture office. The program is clearly demanding but it is no-where close to the other disciplines people try to equivalent it too. 80 hour weeks moving program blocks is not the same as learning anatomy.
^ it really depends on the person. My son for instance has a really hard time with reading comp but is doing math at a 9th grade level and taught himself piano. He's 7. My other son is completely opposite. Struggles with math but is very verbal. He was always reading at a high level and can talk a mile a min with lots of charm and comedic cleverness. I think arch school is probably harder than law for most people because it requires a kind of odd combo of strengths where law and medicine are more focused on a narrower skill set. I did really well in arch school but I don't think I would do so well in law or medicine.
that would be most appropriate if your intern was actually named george, but i think it could work either way.
so, go meet a client and say 'this is george.' she could introduce herself as 'hi, i'm george with jeremy's office.' in fact, i actually have a license and typically introduce myself as a member of the firm rather than as an architect. otherwise, i might say i'm 'with the architect,' rather than saying 'i am the architect,' because i'm not the architect of record.
architect studio grades are subjective and too often based on how much a professor likes the student rather than how capable they will actually be as an architect. many studio professors don't know shit about the profession anyway, except that they can make a chip board form of something they think is cool, no matter how bad their taste is. if architecture school was hard for you, it could possibly be because you didn't wear enough black, or maybe had the wrong style of eyeglasses? just saying, that's one perspective on the issue that could be considered if you wanted to consider it.
I picture architects in training in standardized uniforms like cub scouts with merit badges earned for projects. A side benefit is they would be highly visible and easier to avoid.
Associate architect I like for the 'ass' part but makes me think of organized crime or the way you introduce someone you have to do business with but don't like. "And this is my associate, Mr. Smellypants" (who I will ditch like the plague at the first opportunity). Associate is also the bullshit title they give people to stroke their egos - like associate producer (film) or the associate architect title you can buy from the AIA.
Aug 23, 14 9:26 am ·
·
Miles,
You can't buy Associate architect title from AIA, the last I recall. Associate AIA being "Associate member of American Institute of Architects" not "Architect member of American Institute of Architects".
All this fuss over title envy is bad for business and the prefixes and suffixes are macerations of the word architect. If a person is a graduate then he/she is an architect – period. For God sake nothing bad is going to happen, you need a seal to build something.
One of the hardest things when starting/running your own firm is shaking signed-up clients off to staff so you can run out and find another new one. All the client leg-holding gets perpetuated by these diluted titles. I wish I would have just put “Owner” on my card so I could have said “it’s been great now let me introduce you to your Architect”.
I wonder if the AMA or ABA sell associate memberships ... just think of all the titles one could acquire!
Aug 23, 14 12:24 pm ·
·
Carerra,
Not always the case. Some projects are built without the seal of an architect. If in case of exempt projects, a seal isn't necessarily required but it woud be better if it were at least sealed by a certified building designer like a CPBD but that is another story altogether.
Anyone else think the AIA logo looks like something from Germany in the late1930s? Ve haf ways, Fraulein, you vill not use the term "Architect" incorrectly!
I was just thinking that throughout my licensed career I never put “Architect” on any of my cards, just “AIA”. Really, how stupid. People constantly asking me - “what does AIA mean?”
Was proud to be a member, so long as they stayed the hell out of my way. Over the years they have managed to jam a lot of sticks up their butt with this title thing being just one. Thinking of starting another poll, this one would be on AIA, give me some sample inputs.
If you meet someone in a professional setting and they need to refer to the title on your card to know what you do, you have failed.
---
People don't even know what AIA stands for. Do you really thing they are going to give a damn if you stamp it as a Registered Certified Building Design Professional Associate? no.
Since you have to be an Architect member of AIA to be allowed to use ", AIA" after one's name as it is a protected trademark under U.S. Trademark laws and licensed for use by Architect members... only.......... It is rational to assume ", AIA" after someone's name means they are an Architect licensed somewhere. The issue that matters ultimately is, is the person licensed in the state in which they are engaging architectural services.
AIBD after someone's name implies a person is a certified professional member of AIBD. CPBD after someone's name means they are a certified professional building designer.
AIA is less letters than Architect. CPBD is less letter to type than certified professional building designer. Americans like short acronyms.
I think I'll just make my own title like Master of all Masters. Clients will be like "woohoo that's great." I'll be like "ya it's kinda a big deal." They'll be like "I bet." I'll be like "yeah, now that will be 1000$ an hour." they will be like "damn that's steep architects only charge like 250." I'll be like "ya well you get what you pay for...." I'll be rich. Lol
Not allowed. Can't even use arc or tect The public may get confused and hire you to build a 50 story tower in manhattan which would then not get built anyway without stamp.
In a nation so concerned with protecting the public you would think they would at least entertain the idea of banning gmos and pumping toxins into the aquifer. Well at least I know that my florist is a certified floral designer. Whew I feel safe now. Btw, any word on that yoga mat shit they been putting in bread? Ehh its ok I'm sure. Well off to my certified barber...
Aug 23, 14 5:02 pm ·
·
The licensing laws were largely written by architects. The general public at large (ie. the vast majority.... like 75+%) doesn't really care let alone even know that it is a licensed profession.
Associate Architect or Architect in Training?
Donna, you're right about that legally and I wouldn't recommend calling yourself an architect if you haven't completed the requirements, but in truth, that's what a building designer is. But to go back to a pervious point, who cares what you are called if you know what you are?
If the AIA spent half the time simplifying codes and streamlining the permit process that they spend on these kind of questions, we might have a true vernacular architecture. As it is, the generic stuff that passes for architecture is so devoid of anything wonderful, it's no wonder our advanced civilization has such a pathetic built legacy.
The existing over beaurocratized system produces the kind of professional bifurcation that Steven Ward talks about. I'm a staunch pro-government liberal, but there is way too much regulation for my taste at the local level and not enough at the multi-national level. Then again, that's no surprise.
Wait. The AIA doesn't spend time on finding people who are illegally calling themselves architects, the state board does that.
The AIA is currently working with the associated organizations to simplify paths to licensure, to change the terminology away from "intern" to something that most likely includes the term architect, and to create academic programs that allow one to use the term upon graduation.
I feel I have to be a stickler about this because it's so easy to accuse the AIA of being a bunch of old white men who throw awards banquets for themselves. That attitude betrays a real ignorance of what the AIA is doing right now. If people would deign to be active in their AIAs they would see this for themselves and they could be part of the change.
(Locally, by the way, my AIA is working on streamlining the permit process. I can't speak for other local chapters on that front.)
I like the title Designer. NCARB does want you to use intern though, it is right in their literature.
As for the AIA, I think I discovered the reason I don't like them in the Let's Talk Money thread: in short they screwed up, got in legal hot water, took some bad advice and now everyone has to pay for it. And it is just a club. Archinect is a club too and the monetary dues are non-existent.
Let's start a new AIA (Archinect Is Awesome).
Haven't you ever thought it was funny that the ARE tests you on club documents? Never made sense to me that to get a license from a government agency, you have to regurgitate proprietary club documents. Contracts and agreements can take many forms, and we learn in spec writing for instance that specifying for performance (example: a generic owner-contract agreement) is different than a proprietary spec (A201), and that government is in fact sensitive to this (whereas private work isn't)! An architect I worked for advised me to take the ARE before I got "too smart". I think I may have missed my window? You have to take the ARE before you realize there is more than one way to skin a cat. Perhaps this is why many older interns never get licensed, they miss that window of naivety.
AIA docs are pretty common in the industry and can be useful
as far as 'club docs,' wouldn't you consider the ICC a club with a bunch of proprietary docs?
on a side note, ohio doesn't use the ICC. they developed their own code. which, as it turns out, is pretty close of the ICC docs (i haven't found where the difference is, but they said it is different). however, it seems municipal codes can be published online with free access, whereas apparently the ICC codes are stuck behind a pay gate. i always thought it was odd that the government made me follow laws that i couldn't access without paying a private organization a bunch of $$.
Seems like the problem recent grads have is meeting the internship requirements. I didn't but I work in a small firm, I could see how in a medium to large firm this would be a problem as often the firms have a CA department and the owners don't want the employees to have any idea whats going on on the money side(ie professional practice). Having taken 6 of 7 tests it seems they couldn't be passed without either having worked for a significant amount of time or spending a lot of time studying. Either way you've learned what the profession feels you should know if you can pass the tests so why not drop the intern requirements keep the tests. For fun add a verbal portion that is administered by other architects that when finished you enter an initiation ceremony like the free masons.
"AIA docs are pretty common in the industry and can be useful." Not that I want to add more words to ARE, the Q's could go something like this, "In an owner-contractor agreement, such as the AIA 201...."
And just because something is common, doesn't mean it should be accepted. The intent of the contracts should be studied, not the actual content, don't you think?
Good to hear Donna, I had another impression.
tint,
NCARB's use of the term intern is for literature sake. NCARB can really care less if you call yourself a designer or any unregulated title. Seriously, NCARB can careless. The use of the word intern is simply relating to the name of the IDP program and why the word 'intern' was chosen, one might look back to the beginning of IDP and the documents and discussions leading up to the IDP program coming to being.
I think the choice of intern is because the architectural community wanted to align the terminology closer to how the terms are used in medical and law professions which architects for a long time have wanted the public perception to be because apprentice is associated with construction trades which is seen as 'blue collar' hands oriented while interns is associated with "intellectual"-oriented fields.
Donna -
I actually agree with Thayer-D's comments above. The impression that often comes out of those governing bodies seems to appear that they are ready to go after the ones using improper terminology in describing their credentials (which they should be doing) because it is an easy way to produce very tangible, indisputable results of their system and therefore confirm the need for their job. Nothing says "The system works!" quite like getting the white-collar bad guy. Yet, as TD points out, a lot of this time spend on debating the merits of a name could be spent on creating a system that is much easier to navigate. I'm only starting into my first couple forays in getting through redtape (mind you in Canada, not the US) and find myself shaking my head way too often. On top of that - I actually completed one of my academic co-ops working for a government PM agency, where it was even worse.
The point to be made is that, it is much easier to create singular, 'ah-ha' moments rather than trying to introduce systematic reform in a system that appears to badly need it, that would nullify the need to 'peacock' one-time accomplishments.
"Licensed architects trying to appropriate the term "architect" for their exclusive use is a lost cause. The cat is out of the bag. Deal with it."
*ding ding ding* We have a winner.
I used to vent a whole lot of steam about this. Then I realized it was futile and instead chose to give the term meaning for myself.
BenC, I don't disagree either - I was just trying to point at that I don't believe, and this is based on my experience within it, that the AIA is majorly at fault in this issue. The AIA is radically trying to reformat to serve its members better right now, and it's working with the associated entities (NCARB, ACSA, NAAB) in those efforts.
The next challenge will be bringing the individual state boards into the discussion, and I don't have any firsthand knowledge that this is happening yet.
Donna,
It is possible that in a way it is AIA's fault. AIA was key to creating the licensing boards. They wrote the Architect Acts that were legislated. They were involved in creating NCARB and NAAB and ACSA. Every single year of every single licensing board in the United States... a majority of the members are AIA members. A majority of them work to AIA's bidding. The majority of every single Bill to amend each state's licensing laws are drafted by AIA. AIA is its members and its members work in a sort of consorted effort. Of course, its membership changes and in effect, the legislation shifts. NCARB policies shifts. NAAB policy shifts. and so does ACSA.
Then again it can be said all these associated entities is really AIA behind the scenes because AIA ultimately runs the show of architectural licensing.
However, even then its water under the bridge. AIA today is not quite the same AIA was of 100 years ago, 50 years ago or even 30 years ago.
AIA motivated old policies that are now being changed.
My interest in this thread is mostly derived on what I should call my Intern, esp as he is gaining experience and responsibility, I am having him design projects, meet with owners, and giving him more control & responsibility. But I don't like introducing him as an Intern, as I feel the perception of "interns" has been ruined by popular culture, and the business world.
I don't like the "in training" because it seems made up.
I don't like "designer" because so many people who don't have a degree in architecture (or sometimes any degree) are calling themselves that, there should be something that separates him from someone who doesn't have that education.
I don't like project manager or project coordinator (although those were both titles I had before Licensure) because it implies that he is just pushing paper.
I have been using Apprentice Architect, going back to the days of old, and that is how I most accurately see our relationship. However, I am not sure I am able to allow him to use that term himself (on business cards, and as a sign off on his e-mails.).
I also take some offense to whoever keeps posting how easy arch school is/was, perhaps they just went to a bad school, or something, I know in my school less than half completed the program. Most were weeded out after the second year. while I may agree that you didn't necessarily need to be the smartest person to complete school, it was certainly a very time consuming and rigorous program, and yes people did fail out of the program, or were asked to leave. I know several people who transferred out of Architecture to Engineering and found it easier, or at least less time consuming & more predictable.
Jeremy, not to reopen the topic too much, but your perspective is pretty good. I think the most important issue mentioned in this thread (and the other dozen or so like it) is that many people do not find themselves under a specific "mentor" but more as one grunt in an office of many. From what I've seen, such an environment is not as fruitful to the development of fresh graduates and helps perpetuate the intern stereotype.
To your second point, I've claimed that architecture school is easier relative to Law or Medicine as that was where the discussion was heading. I personally have my master's from the top school in my country and worked just as long in studio as anyone else all while working part-time in a real architecture office. The program is clearly demanding but it is no-where close to the other disciplines people try to equivalent it too. 80 hour weeks moving program blocks is not the same as learning anatomy.
^ it really depends on the person. My son for instance has a really hard time with reading comp but is doing math at a 9th grade level and taught himself piano. He's 7. My other son is completely opposite. Struggles with math but is very verbal. He was always reading at a high level and can talk a mile a min with lots of charm and comedic cleverness. I think arch school is probably harder than law for most people because it requires a kind of odd combo of strengths where law and medicine are more focused on a narrower skill set. I did really well in arch school but I don't think I would do so well in law or medicine.
jeremy, why not call your intern 'george'
that would be most appropriate if your intern was actually named george, but i think it could work either way.
so, go meet a client and say 'this is george.' she could introduce herself as 'hi, i'm george with jeremy's office.' in fact, i actually have a license and typically introduce myself as a member of the firm rather than as an architect. otherwise, i might say i'm 'with the architect,' rather than saying 'i am the architect,' because i'm not the architect of record.
architect studio grades are subjective and too often based on how much a professor likes the student rather than how capable they will actually be as an architect. many studio professors don't know shit about the profession anyway, except that they can make a chip board form of something they think is cool, no matter how bad their taste is. if architecture school was hard for you, it could possibly be because you didn't wear enough black, or maybe had the wrong style of eyeglasses? just saying, that's one perspective on the issue that could be considered if you wanted to consider it.
Just picked this up from AIA
I picture architects in training in standardized uniforms like cub scouts with merit badges earned for projects. A side benefit is they would be highly visible and easier to avoid.
Associate architect I like for the 'ass' part but makes me think of organized crime or the way you introduce someone you have to do business with but don't like. "And this is my associate, Mr. Smellypants" (who I will ditch like the plague at the first opportunity). Associate is also the bullshit title they give people to stroke their egos - like associate producer (film) or the associate architect title you can buy from the AIA.
Miles,
You can't buy Associate architect title from AIA, the last I recall. Associate AIA being "Associate member of American Institute of Architects" not "Architect member of American Institute of Architects".
Miles, LOL!
All this fuss over title envy is bad for business and the prefixes and suffixes are macerations of the word architect. If a person is a graduate then he/she is an architect – period. For God sake nothing bad is going to happen, you need a seal to build something.
One of the hardest things when starting/running your own firm is shaking signed-up clients off to staff so you can run out and find another new one. All the client leg-holding gets perpetuated by these diluted titles. I wish I would have just put “Owner” on my card so I could have said “it’s been great now let me introduce you to your Architect”.
^ right on Carerra
Associate Member of the American Institute of Architects. The implication is clear, except of course to the layman.
AIA Associate Membership Application
In 2012 the fee was $159.
I wonder if the AMA or ABA sell associate memberships ... just think of all the titles one could acquire!
Carerra,
Not always the case. Some projects are built without the seal of an architect. If in case of exempt projects, a seal isn't necessarily required but it woud be better if it were at least sealed by a certified building designer like a CPBD but that is another story altogether.
Anyone else think the AIA logo looks like something from Germany in the late1930s? Ve haf ways, Fraulein, you vill not use the term "Architect" incorrectly!
I was just thinking that throughout my licensed career I never put “Architect” on any of my cards, just “AIA”. Really, how stupid. People constantly asking me - “what does AIA mean?”
Was proud to be a member, so long as they stayed the hell out of my way. Over the years they have managed to jam a lot of sticks up their butt with this title thing being just one. Thinking of starting another poll, this one would be on AIA, give me some sample inputs.
I have business cards with no title on them.
If you meet someone in a professional setting and they need to refer to the title on your card to know what you do, you have failed.
---
People don't even know what AIA stands for. Do you really thing they are going to give a damn if you stamp it as a Registered Certified Building Design Professional Associate? no.
American Institute of Autistics
Since you have to be an Architect member of AIA to be allowed to use ", AIA" after one's name as it is a protected trademark under U.S. Trademark laws and licensed for use by Architect members... only.......... It is rational to assume ", AIA" after someone's name means they are an Architect licensed somewhere. The issue that matters ultimately is, is the person licensed in the state in which they are engaging architectural services.
AIBD after someone's name implies a person is a certified professional member of AIBD. CPBD after someone's name means they are a certified professional building designer.
AIA is less letters than Architect. CPBD is less letter to type than certified professional building designer. Americans like short acronyms.
"Im a mothafuckin PIMP"
I think I'll just make my own title like Master of all Masters. Clients will be like "woohoo that's great." I'll be like "ya it's kinda a big deal." They'll be like "I bet." I'll be like "yeah, now that will be 1000$ an hour." they will be like "damn that's steep architects only charge like 250." I'll be like "ya well you get what you pay for...." I'll be rich. Lol
Not allowed. Can't even use arc or tect The public may get confused and hire you to build a 50 story tower in manhattan which would then not get built anyway without stamp.
In a nation so concerned with protecting the public you would think they would at least entertain the idea of banning gmos and pumping toxins into the aquifer. Well at least I know that my florist is a certified floral designer. Whew I feel safe now. Btw, any word on that yoga mat shit they been putting in bread? Ehh its ok I'm sure. Well off to my certified barber...
The licensing laws were largely written by architects. The general public at large (ie. the vast majority.... like 75+%) doesn't really care let alone even know that it is a licensed profession.
jla-x, it's the paper trail that's important. Especially the green paper.
bump for people who want to talk about who can call themselves 'architect'
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.