It means that instead of going through the previous BEA evaluation, an architect who does not qualify for certification by the standard route would have been able to pursue alternative certification, but instead of the BEA education evaluation and dossier and interview process, the procedure would be that they can pursue alternative certification if:
1. They've been continuously licensed with no discipline in a US jurisdiction for 5 years.
AND
2. They document that they've completed experience equivalent to IDP, by having an NCARB-certified architect sign off on it.
AND
3. If they don't have an NAAB degree they must get their education evaluated by EESA.
In other words instead of continuing to put resources into operating the little-used BEA program, NCARB was trying to outsource those evaluation processes to EESA for the education part, and to IDP-type advisor architects for the experience part.
This resolution failed to pass.
Jun 20, 15 7:34 pm ·
·
Boneheads and yet they didn't like it.
Riiiight !
Time to just pursue engineering licensure and f--- NCARB's nonsense.
I don't recall that proposal, but there was a poll that went to the boards this winter, and many states indicated they were unlikely to accept any alternative that reduced the BEA requirements. There are already a few that don't accept a BEA, and several that don't accept BEFA, as-is.
The position of most of the states that indicated they would not accept this is that if they were willing to license people who don't have NAAB degrees, they'd already be doing that under their state's regulations. They've already decided that their state requires an NAAB degree, so they're not going to accept an alternative that allows a workaround.
"NAAB accreditation is the primary means by which professional degre programs in architecture assure quality to students and the public."
You would think they would proofread the front page of their website. Maybe time for a little quality in their communications?
Jun 20, 15 9:58 pm ·
·
Roll eyes....
Yet they approved amendment to BEFA and they can't spell.
Every state except maybe one or two had experience based alternative to licensure when their laws was enacted.
Now, what's the justification for a 'worthless' NAAB accredited degree?
Jun 20, 15 11:02 pm ·
·
Spontaneous,
The reason BEA is so hardly used is simple:
When a person can become licensed in as little as 8 years or now... within as little as 5-1/2 years on the degree path and also be NCARB Certified and can undergo reciprocity to any state. Who the hell will go through 8 to 15 years to get initially license and still have to wait until 10 YEARS after licensure and document 10 YEARS of post-licensure practice just to get licensed. This is fucking bullshit. Even you have to agree to that. It is b.s. for anyone who already has a longer required minimum duration path to be licensed to be double penalized before they can under go reciprocity.
Engineers don't put engineers that undergoes experience path through this non-sense.
If I want to become an engineer in another state from the one of initial licensure, I just simply file the paperwork, submit the fees and transmit the records. The maybe 6 months that it might take to get approval for comity (reciprocity). By the time I have to go through all that crap of BEA, I could have a license in every single state as an engineer for the most part.
So what gives? What the hell is NCARB's or these states problems? They voluntarily decided to discontinue experience path for initial licensure in their state. Before BEA, they had a more efficient system for crying out loud.
It appears that this is all about, if you don't go to our NAAB accredited club, you can't be one of us. My response is "Fine. I'll choose another path that will allow me to design buildings".
Donna was talking about it on another thread - particularly with regard to engineers, not architects. I was talking in sweeping terms, slippery-slope and all other idiom...
Jun 21, 15 7:46 pm ·
·
Hmmm... I thought they have a separate license for Structural Engineers and Professional Engineers. I believe that is still the way it is.
I'll take a look but then it really doesn't apply to me that much because I am not in Illinois and doubt I would be doing any projects there.
Rick, just DO something. Pick a path and actually DO it. Doesn't matter if it's engineering, architecture, game development, pastry chef, dog groomer... Anything. Stop posting and do it.
Does this look familiar?: "He hasn't produced anything ever, and all he ever does is write lots of incoherent posts while coming up with excuses for not doing anything. He's like a kid saying he's going to build an airplane, while not being able to fix a flat tire on his bike. He's been posting for three years about all the things he's going to do, and hasn't done one single thing."
That was written about you, over 15 YEARS AGO on another forum, unrelated to architecture, and continues to apply today.
Stop "working through this at some point in the process of things" and go get a full time job, save up 3 or 4 months of rent, move out of your parents' house to a region with a better job market, and move forward. Launch already! You're mid-30s with no employment history - you're running out of time in most of the professions you've ever mentioned to get some entry level experience and get your foot in the door.
Jun 21, 15 8:03 pm ·
·
Here's reason why, I have to stay close to home because parent's health conditions. That is why. If anything happens to my Dad for example for any reason, I have to manage the house worth over $150K which is where my business is located.
If anything happens to my Mom, god only knows what the hell the situation can turn into.
As for software development, I already have some stuff in the works on that. It's for development of software/video games for augmented reality and similar technologies running on modern computer systems using Unity 5. I don't need to relocate for these places. I work independently not in cubicles.
Sigh. That's just more excuses. The vast majority of people manage to move out of their parents' homes, and the vast majority of those parents have houses worth far more than 150k. You have two living parents and you're not even an only child. This is just your latest excuse to do nothing.
Jun 21, 15 9:23 pm ·
·
Regarding this 15 year old thread:
For your information when I work in software field, I had been working on software since 1986/1987 in creating video games and other tools. 15 years ago, on a forum that has to do with Commodore software, I had largely stopped producing Commodore 64 software by 1997/1998.
In the 1980s, you create software either by the bootstrap with hope to make your ROI or you have VCs funding the development. Sorry, but VCs stopped funding C64 software projects by 1995 for the most part.
By 2000, you had maybe an active user base of around 1500 to 3000 people. About 5000 other semi-active folks who are mostly going to user's groups for the social interaction of fellow Commodore 8 bit users. Aside from that, they mostly use their Commodore 8-bit to play 15-20 year old games at that time.
At around 1500-3000 users you can really market to online, you have to look hard at the user base demographics, spending demographics, etc. Are they willing to spend money on a new Commodore 64 software? Is there enough people to invest 9 to 18 months full-time to develop commercial grade Commodore 64 software. Commercial grade in late 1980s standards took this much time. They were written in machine language. I had to do the job of 5 people in the same time. Average software development team for most commercial software projects for C64 was 5. Lead Coder, Graphician, Musician, Sound effects, Marketing. In some cases, I would effectively be doing the work of 5- 10 people and I have to do it in the same 9 to 18 months. This isn't going to be easy, you know. Unless I have a realistic and serious intent on their part to buy the software, it is going to be unrealistic for me to invest that kind of time for no return. Lets think about it. back then, commercial software projects often cost $250-450K to bring it to market. When you are paying $35K roughly for a team of 5 people, you are looking at salaries from $25K to $50K and the team members working 40-80 hours a week. Plus you have other associated costs not to mention taxes. Unless the whole team are business partners working a "labor of love" (ie. working without pay) for 9 to 18 months straights with hopes to make a boon on sales. You're looking to make not just $250K or $500K. You're looking at making $1 Million in sales or more. That was great when you had 5+ million C64 users and you had a publisher to sell your software and get your software ad in Compute! or Compute! Gazette or other well published magazines to get the market awareness as well as in the stores.
Sure, people complained but they weren't giving real indication that they would be serious buyers. Lets take a look at the people in question.... a number of them were software pirates in the 1980s. They undermine sales. Think about that for a moment.
Right now, I have a project under preliminary stages (prior to crowdfunding campaign) for video game development for castAR.
Jun 21, 15 9:30 pm ·
·
Spontaneous,
It's my house, too! Who's going to maintain this 1875 house when they pass on? My brother.... lol. Doubt that.
I have equipment that I can not really have in an apartment unit (especially a typical 500 sq.ft. apartments that you have to share with 1 or 2 other people unrelated to you ) and you can't really run a business out of a residential apartment unit. At least, I can run a business where I am at. My property is zoned for it.
If you're trapped at your parent's house because of the impossibility of moving equipment, and so on and so forth, then how are you going to become an engineer? And how would it have helped you for NCARB to change the BEA requirements? You'd still have had to get licensed somewhere, and to do that you'd have to acquire some experience somewhere, and you keep saying it's impossible to find jobs in the field in your location.
When your parents pass on, or even sooner, sell the house. There's no point in keeping a house in a place with no prospects.
You just keep going in circles with the excuses. In circles for over 15 years.
Jun 21, 15 10:20 pm ·
·
Base Cost Value is over $200K but recent assessed value has dropped due to economy but value goes up and down but still.
That's besides the point. Big cities may have inflated price value but what do you get? Again, what would I gain by going to a big city? Increased cost of operations to my business?
What would I get as an income by being someone's employee working for 100+ hours a week?
It is not like I am going to make more money by working more hours? You guys don't pay overtime rate. It's a flat salary a money whether you work 40 hours a week or 120 hours a week. It is still the same pay a month.
When it is my own business, I work my own hours. I don't have some asshole disrespecting me and screaming in your face because they f--- up in explaining their instructions. I can't be "fired" because it is my business. I make the decisions not be someone's bitch for peanuts. Sorry, I don't particular, like working for other people because employers don't respect their employees. They are just disposable as toilet paper in their eyes.
Why would I want to marry into their drama?
I have a software project for castAR that I will be working on a crowdfunding campaign in late summer to early fall. This is probably a 2-3 year project or group of projects.
Jun 21, 15 10:22 pm ·
·
Spontaneous,
Renting a place. However, there is an engineer in town or the area. There is also something called contract employment. Work with a couple engineering firms. I have to talk to them before I commit to engineering license. I still have to decide whether or not pursuit of licensure to be a 'service-based" (consultant) business is worth it.
However, I rather keep close by that I am within reasonable commute distance to Astoria. Not some place half way across the damn country.
Jun 21, 15 10:33 pm ·
·
On the software development business, it doesn't matter where I live. The sales and distribution is online. I don't have to be in Silicon Valley or Portland/Beaverton area or Seattle area.
Jun 21, 15 10:35 pm ·
·
I don't want to live in Los Angeles area or Texas and the confederate states. (reference to the states that were part of the Confederates during the Civil War) which happens to be the hotspots for architectural jobs and similarly for building oriented engineering. This is because land there is cheap and there is little regulations that makes the cost of construction go up so high.
I used to live in Los Angeles, California area but why would I want to go back there. It isn't exactly something I would want to live their for an entire damn career.
Jun 21, 15 10:55 pm ·
·
At this stage of the game, I am more inclined to working with the software development work as I wouldn't be someone else's slave.
Why should I do 90% of the work so someone else gets 90% of the pay?
I don't like other people that much. I don't like you that much.
This is what I heard, so don't quote me on it. The resolution failed by one vote, but was amended on the floor to exclude those with a HS diploma and 4 year non-arch degree. The revised resolution will be up for vote again next year. Hopefully it will pass as amended.
Then just remove BEA altogether as is and stick with NCARB Certification as is. Of course, they'll need to discuss this a bit.
I'll be working with OBAE to reinstitute alternate paths to licensure. Until university is free for all, we should never require 4+ year degrees to become license. If everyone can go to architecture school,without accruing student loan debts, (provide they pass their courses and keep their grades up), then yes.
I propose something similar to BEA proposal for initial licensure which would require anywhere from 8 to 18 years of education/experience depending on education and experience. The experience would be basically additional IDP training hours. Someone with no post-secondary degree (not 1-yr certificate), must attain roughly 18 years worth of IDP training hours.
Someone an associate level degree from a U.S. Nationally accredited or regionally accredited institution or foreign equivalent will need to document roughly 12 years of IDP (22,440 training hours) aside from the 2 years degree.
Someone with a Bachelors degree from a U.S. Nationally accredited (not regionally accredited) degree or foreign equivalent would require 15,360 training hours of IDP and that would be about 8 years of internship and 4 years for the degree.
Someone with a regionally accredited bachelor's degree or Canadian equivalent would be require 11,520 training hours which is about 6 years of IDP and 4 years for education (as long as the hours are earned in accordance with schedule).
Someone with a pre-professional degree in architecture from a U.S. regionally accredited university or Canadian equivalent or any foreign degree that meets NCARB EESA evaluation, would only need to document 7680 training hours.
A person can choose to attain a higher degree more IDP training. Remember, EVERYONE in IDP has some education. They all have to at least have a high school diploma or equivalent to enroll in IDP in the first place.
The additional hours beyond the core hours maybe simply supplemental hours reported as is.
If approved, it would make Oregon's experience path in some way more rigorous than any other state for those without degrees. A person with no degree will likely be at least as competent as someone with an NAAB degree and the 2-3 years of IDP. At the youngest, they would be 18 years old when they start. They would be 36 years old when they complete the longest path if they get the IDP hours reported on a timely basis.
I would recommend BEA to continue development and even reconsider the proposal as it is. We should allow people with other degrees to have a path to licensure and as a boards understand the need of people to move between occupations from other occupations to architecture as well as from Architecture into other occupations. Otherwise, it is sealing the architecture profession only to those as a first degree. It harms the whole reciprocity of those that need to have mobility and these professionals have the same need for mobility as those with an NAAB accredited degree.
I propose a path for initial licensure that actually reasonably allow people to get the initial comprehensive training to get licensed by experience. Currently, someone without a degree would have to undergo 8 or 9 years of experience for initial licensure in the neighboring states of California and Washington. Then an additional 10 years for reciprocity.
At least at this point, the goal is more to establish and begin a dialog for paths to licensure without an NAAB accredited degree.
Do away with BEA and maybe require a minimum of 3 years of post-licensure experience. It will be up to the states to amend their alternate paths to licensure if they feel they need to require more years of experience than currently required.
My point for OBAE is to establish a dialogue and develop alternate paths for people from different backgrounds to have a path to licensure without necessarily requiring them to attain an NAAB accredited degree even though it would be encouraged.
Balkins, you just said you dislike other people and don't care to work for them, so how is it going to help you to convince your state to allow this 8 to 18 years of IDP track? No state is ever going to allow a route to licensing that's based entirely on remote supervision.
Jun 23, 15 7:40 pm ·
·
I didn't say I don't like people.
I never said to allow route to licensing that's based ENTIRELY on remote supervision but in fact you already can with IDP. Direct supervision allows for remote contact but I'm not suggesting entirely remote contact where people can't meet in person. Direct supervision doesn't require under IDP that the person has to work in the architect's office. They have to be able to regularly meet in person. Oregon already has an established administrative rule regarding that and approving that provide a degree of record keeping in maintained which should already be in practice with anyone. How hard is the trouble to note for precisely 15 seconds that it takes to jot down the time when met, date, and end of in person contact. How hard is it to take notes? Isn't that something you should do even when supervising in-office staff.
Not a hard task to do unless you're incompetent and disorganized.
Anyone with a degree should.
If you read carefully what I was suggesting, we are talking about IDP. I'm not talking about entirely remote. However, remote experience is accepted especially in this computer age driven design process. Hell, you got people doing out in the field project management and other tasks like taking a punchlist and go throughout a site or doing field documenting a building. The architect isn't going to necessarily babysit this the entire time. He or she might be busy meeting with a client. Should this experience count? Sure. Should people hired on contract working with a project that the architect is working on, be allowed IDP training hours doing tasks for the architect. Sure, temporarily hiring someone due to locality of the contracted employee is convenient as long as the architect has the necessary means of communication and oversight. This stuff doesn't need the architect to be within 10 feet of the contract employee at all times. It is legal experience in Oregon. It is acceptable experience in IDP. Sometimes, some work needs more in-person communication.
My point is if you read what I said is I am not going to do 90% of the work so someone else gets 90% of the pay. I said, I don't like people that much to do that.
I'm not suggesting necessarily 8 to 18 years of IDP. It is more like 4 to 18 years and the lower numbers are contingent on education from associates level and higher. 18 years is based on experience only and that being basically IDP.
IDP is not entirely remote experience only. So yes, if I were to proceed with licensure under one of these paths, I would have to be employed by someone be it contracted employment or not. In fact, it is more training hours not years. Years are relative but the proposed rules would be based on training hours not 'years'. The number of years would depend on several factors, education and how hard someone works. So if someone works 60-120 hours a week, they are likely to work through the training hours in less time than someone who works only at 35 hours. It can take longer if you work at a slower pace.
Supplementary experience would likely need to be under an architect or engineer as you can't get all those experience under things like EPC.
It is more to begin a discussion and fine tune the details. I'm not suggesting experience as a building designer being counted. It isn't normally counted in any of the states so it isn't being suggested here. I may propose increasing the amount of time allowed under an engineer aside from that under an architect. So currently ~1870 hours can be under an engineer in Experience Setting O, we can allow the maximums to be multiplied proportionally as well as the minimum number of hours required to be under a registered architect under setting A.
My proposal isn't really benefiting me that much aside for allowing a path for initial licensure in Oregon without having to get licensed out of State, then practicing 10 years outside that state just to get licensed in this state which is a ridiculous burden if you don't live close to California border. It is ridiculous to do that. However, I'm not proposing a effortless path for me. I basically would have to earn 11,220 training hours of IDP or 22,440 training hours dependent on completing a bachelor's degree or not completing one and just an associate. Two Associates does not equal a bachelor's as far as the proposed rule is concerned. Transcripts would be required and that would determined the requirements. If I was designing it for me, I would have made it more easier for me.
ALL applicants/candidates for Licensure will still have to pass the ARE and other state exams.
It is a path that allows more people to pursue licensure but it doesn't make it easier.
You try to show me a person who been working on IDP earning over 11,000 hours to over 15,000 hours without an NAAB accredited or architecture degree, who isn't competent to practice architecture.
In fact, some states gives some credit for path to licensure and total time would still be less than what I propose.
I'm proposing probably the lengthiest and most rigorous experience path to licensure than any other state.
I'm proposing a fairly rigorous path. Reality is these IDP hours may take 25% longer number of years for some. It can take possibly 12 years to complete IDP that may normally take 9-10 years to complete. Where am I suggesting an easy cakewalk for licensure.
"I don't like other people that much. I don't like you that much."
Do you ever think about how you're ever going to find any architect to agree to supervise your IDP - remote or not - once they google you? Why would anybody ever put up with your attitude?
Jun 23, 15 9:35 pm ·
·
What attitude?
Like I should give a hoot about Sponty? It isn't like he is offering a job.
or
Not willing to be some else's slave working for peanuts?
I've done enough charity work in my life that I don't need to be doing charity work for a for-profit business employer.
I hate to tell you this, NEWSFLASH, everyone with leadership qualities has an attitude unless they are a bunch of pansies who can't think for themselves.
Sorry but part of being a free-will independent minded person including being a leader, attitude is part of it. It goes with the territory to stand up against bullshit and other assholes.
Business is war and the timid is eaten for breakfast by the cutthroats. If you don't have an attitude, and tenacity, your through. You can't succeed at anything.
Jun 23, 15 11:51 pm ·
·
Regarding your question, are you assuming I am really interested at this point in working for an Architect?
I'm interested in doing my own things not other people's crap. When I'm doing someone else's work (working for someone else such as an architect), it isn't my own thing. I don't have the same passion when it is someone else's thing.
I realize this is an old thread but for anyone interested in the NCARB BEA certificate, NCARB changed it as of January 2017. For those with 4 year architecture degrees (pre-professional, BED, etc...), the process appears to be much more straight forward and the fees have been substantially reduced. Based on info on the NCARB website (as of March 2017), I found that 44 states accept the BEA. The states that didn't were NY, WI, MI, MN, ID and MS and looking at state requirements for these 6, it looked like 4 of the 6 allowed an alternate path to the education requirement, meaning you can probably get registered there but it would take a little extra work than typical NCARB reciprocity. I believe the sticklers for the degree were MI and MS.
Mar 2, 17 3:50 pm ·
·
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.
Can someone make heads or tails of this from NCARB....
http://www.ncarb.org/News-and-Events/News/2015/June-Resolutions.aspx
Particularly Resolution 2015-01
It means that instead of going through the previous BEA evaluation, an architect who does not qualify for certification by the standard route would have been able to pursue alternative certification, but instead of the BEA education evaluation and dossier and interview process, the procedure would be that they can pursue alternative certification if:
1. They've been continuously licensed with no discipline in a US jurisdiction for 5 years.
AND
2. They document that they've completed experience equivalent to IDP, by having an NCARB-certified architect sign off on it.
AND
3. If they don't have an NAAB degree they must get their education evaluated by EESA.
In other words instead of continuing to put resources into operating the little-used BEA program, NCARB was trying to outsource those evaluation processes to EESA for the education part, and to IDP-type advisor architects for the experience part.
This resolution failed to pass.
Boneheads and yet they didn't like it.
Riiiight !
Time to just pursue engineering licensure and f--- NCARB's nonsense.
What happened to the proposal from last year to reduce the BEA to 1-year of practice and an existing registration from an NCARB state?
I don't recall that proposal, but there was a poll that went to the boards this winter, and many states indicated they were unlikely to accept any alternative that reduced the BEA requirements. There are already a few that don't accept a BEA, and several that don't accept BEFA, as-is.
The position of most of the states that indicated they would not accept this is that if they were willing to license people who don't have NAAB degrees, they'd already be doing that under their state's regulations. They've already decided that their state requires an NAAB degree, so they're not going to accept an alternative that allows a workaround.
From the NAAB website:
"NAAB accreditation is the primary means by which professional degre programs in architecture assure quality to students and the public."
You would think they would proofread the front page of their website. Maybe time for a little quality in their communications?
Roll eyes....
Yet they approved amendment to BEFA and they can't spell.
Every state except maybe one or two had experience based alternative to licensure when their laws was enacted.
Now, what's the justification for a 'worthless' NAAB accredited degree?
Spontaneous,
The reason BEA is so hardly used is simple:
When a person can become licensed in as little as 8 years or now... within as little as 5-1/2 years on the degree path and also be NCARB Certified and can undergo reciprocity to any state. Who the hell will go through 8 to 15 years to get initially license and still have to wait until 10 YEARS after licensure and document 10 YEARS of post-licensure practice just to get licensed. This is fucking bullshit. Even you have to agree to that. It is b.s. for anyone who already has a longer required minimum duration path to be licensed to be double penalized before they can under go reciprocity.
Engineers don't put engineers that undergoes experience path through this non-sense.
If I want to become an engineer in another state from the one of initial licensure, I just simply file the paperwork, submit the fees and transmit the records. The maybe 6 months that it might take to get approval for comity (reciprocity). By the time I have to go through all that crap of BEA, I could have a license in every single state as an engineer for the most part.
So what gives? What the hell is NCARB's or these states problems? They voluntarily decided to discontinue experience path for initial licensure in their state. Before BEA, they had a more efficient system for crying out loud.
It appears that this is all about, if you don't go to our NAAB accredited club, you can't be one of us. My response is "Fine. I'll choose another path that will allow me to design buildings".
You already said that. Sounds like a great decision. So go do it!
Well... just have to work this through at some point in the process of things.
On the other hand Illinois eliminates licensure- reciprocity to follow
I never heard of that.
Donna was talking about it on another thread - particularly with regard to engineers, not architects. I was talking in sweeping terms, slippery-slope and all other idiom...
Hmmm... I thought they have a separate license for Structural Engineers and Professional Engineers. I believe that is still the way it is.
I'll take a look but then it really doesn't apply to me that much because I am not in Illinois and doubt I would be doing any projects there.
Rick, just DO something. Pick a path and actually DO it. Doesn't matter if it's engineering, architecture, game development, pastry chef, dog groomer... Anything. Stop posting and do it.
Does this look familiar?: "He hasn't produced anything ever, and all he ever does is write lots of incoherent posts while coming up with excuses for not doing anything. He's like a kid saying he's going to build an airplane, while not being able to fix a flat tire on his bike. He's been posting for three years about all the things he's going to do, and hasn't done one single thing."
That was written about you, over 15 YEARS AGO on another forum, unrelated to architecture, and continues to apply today.
Stop "working through this at some point in the process of things" and go get a full time job, save up 3 or 4 months of rent, move out of your parents' house to a region with a better job market, and move forward. Launch already! You're mid-30s with no employment history - you're running out of time in most of the professions you've ever mentioned to get some entry level experience and get your foot in the door.
Here's reason why, I have to stay close to home because parent's health conditions. That is why. If anything happens to my Dad for example for any reason, I have to manage the house worth over $150K which is where my business is located.
If anything happens to my Mom, god only knows what the hell the situation can turn into.
As for software development, I already have some stuff in the works on that. It's for development of software/video games for augmented reality and similar technologies running on modern computer systems using Unity 5. I don't need to relocate for these places. I work independently not in cubicles.
Sigh. That's just more excuses. The vast majority of people manage to move out of their parents' homes, and the vast majority of those parents have houses worth far more than 150k. You have two living parents and you're not even an only child. This is just your latest excuse to do nothing.
Regarding this 15 year old thread:
For your information when I work in software field, I had been working on software since 1986/1987 in creating video games and other tools. 15 years ago, on a forum that has to do with Commodore software, I had largely stopped producing Commodore 64 software by 1997/1998.
In the 1980s, you create software either by the bootstrap with hope to make your ROI or you have VCs funding the development. Sorry, but VCs stopped funding C64 software projects by 1995 for the most part.
By 2000, you had maybe an active user base of around 1500 to 3000 people. About 5000 other semi-active folks who are mostly going to user's groups for the social interaction of fellow Commodore 8 bit users. Aside from that, they mostly use their Commodore 8-bit to play 15-20 year old games at that time.
At around 1500-3000 users you can really market to online, you have to look hard at the user base demographics, spending demographics, etc. Are they willing to spend money on a new Commodore 64 software? Is there enough people to invest 9 to 18 months full-time to develop commercial grade Commodore 64 software. Commercial grade in late 1980s standards took this much time. They were written in machine language. I had to do the job of 5 people in the same time. Average software development team for most commercial software projects for C64 was 5. Lead Coder, Graphician, Musician, Sound effects, Marketing. In some cases, I would effectively be doing the work of 5- 10 people and I have to do it in the same 9 to 18 months. This isn't going to be easy, you know. Unless I have a realistic and serious intent on their part to buy the software, it is going to be unrealistic for me to invest that kind of time for no return. Lets think about it. back then, commercial software projects often cost $250-450K to bring it to market. When you are paying $35K roughly for a team of 5 people, you are looking at salaries from $25K to $50K and the team members working 40-80 hours a week. Plus you have other associated costs not to mention taxes. Unless the whole team are business partners working a "labor of love" (ie. working without pay) for 9 to 18 months straights with hopes to make a boon on sales. You're looking to make not just $250K or $500K. You're looking at making $1 Million in sales or more. That was great when you had 5+ million C64 users and you had a publisher to sell your software and get your software ad in Compute! or Compute! Gazette or other well published magazines to get the market awareness as well as in the stores.
Sure, people complained but they weren't giving real indication that they would be serious buyers. Lets take a look at the people in question.... a number of them were software pirates in the 1980s. They undermine sales. Think about that for a moment.
Right now, I have a project under preliminary stages (prior to crowdfunding campaign) for video game development for castAR.
Spontaneous,
It's my house, too! Who's going to maintain this 1875 house when they pass on? My brother.... lol. Doubt that.
I have equipment that I can not really have in an apartment unit (especially a typical 500 sq.ft. apartments that you have to share with 1 or 2 other people unrelated to you ) and you can't really run a business out of a residential apartment unit. At least, I can run a business where I am at. My property is zoned for it.
If you're trapped at your parent's house because of the impossibility of moving equipment, and so on and so forth, then how are you going to become an engineer? And how would it have helped you for NCARB to change the BEA requirements? You'd still have had to get licensed somewhere, and to do that you'd have to acquire some experience somewhere, and you keep saying it's impossible to find jobs in the field in your location.
When your parents pass on, or even sooner, sell the house. There's no point in keeping a house in a place with no prospects.
You just keep going in circles with the excuses. In circles for over 15 years.
Base Cost Value is over $200K but recent assessed value has dropped due to economy but value goes up and down but still.
That's besides the point. Big cities may have inflated price value but what do you get? Again, what would I gain by going to a big city? Increased cost of operations to my business?
What would I get as an income by being someone's employee working for 100+ hours a week?
It is not like I am going to make more money by working more hours? You guys don't pay overtime rate. It's a flat salary a money whether you work 40 hours a week or 120 hours a week. It is still the same pay a month.
When it is my own business, I work my own hours. I don't have some asshole disrespecting me and screaming in your face because they f--- up in explaining their instructions. I can't be "fired" because it is my business. I make the decisions not be someone's bitch for peanuts. Sorry, I don't particular, like working for other people because employers don't respect their employees. They are just disposable as toilet paper in their eyes.
Why would I want to marry into their drama?
I have a software project for castAR that I will be working on a crowdfunding campaign in late summer to early fall. This is probably a 2-3 year project or group of projects.
Spontaneous,
Renting a place. However, there is an engineer in town or the area. There is also something called contract employment. Work with a couple engineering firms. I have to talk to them before I commit to engineering license. I still have to decide whether or not pursuit of licensure to be a 'service-based" (consultant) business is worth it.
However, I rather keep close by that I am within reasonable commute distance to Astoria. Not some place half way across the damn country.
On the software development business, it doesn't matter where I live. The sales and distribution is online. I don't have to be in Silicon Valley or Portland/Beaverton area or Seattle area.
I don't want to live in Los Angeles area or Texas and the confederate states. (reference to the states that were part of the Confederates during the Civil War) which happens to be the hotspots for architectural jobs and similarly for building oriented engineering. This is because land there is cheap and there is little regulations that makes the cost of construction go up so high.
I used to live in Los Angeles, California area but why would I want to go back there. It isn't exactly something I would want to live their for an entire damn career.
At this stage of the game, I am more inclined to working with the software development work as I wouldn't be someone else's slave.
Why should I do 90% of the work so someone else gets 90% of the pay?
I don't like other people that much. I don't like you that much.
I don't like other people that much. I don't like you that much.
With this line Richard wins Archinect for this Monday. Better luck tomorrow, everyone!
ZING!
Good morning!
This is what I heard, so don't quote me on it. The resolution failed by one vote, but was amended on the floor to exclude those with a HS diploma and 4 year non-arch degree. The revised resolution will be up for vote again next year. Hopefully it will pass as amended.
Ncarb is useless.
Then just remove BEA altogether as is and stick with NCARB Certification as is. Of course, they'll need to discuss this a bit.
I'll be working with OBAE to reinstitute alternate paths to licensure. Until university is free for all, we should never require 4+ year degrees to become license. If everyone can go to architecture school,without accruing student loan debts, (provide they pass their courses and keep their grades up), then yes.
I propose something similar to BEA proposal for initial licensure which would require anywhere from 8 to 18 years of education/experience depending on education and experience. The experience would be basically additional IDP training hours. Someone with no post-secondary degree (not 1-yr certificate), must attain roughly 18 years worth of IDP training hours.
Someone an associate level degree from a U.S. Nationally accredited or regionally accredited institution or foreign equivalent will need to document roughly 12 years of IDP (22,440 training hours) aside from the 2 years degree.
Someone with a Bachelors degree from a U.S. Nationally accredited (not regionally accredited) degree or foreign equivalent would require 15,360 training hours of IDP and that would be about 8 years of internship and 4 years for the degree.
Someone with a regionally accredited bachelor's degree or Canadian equivalent would be require 11,520 training hours which is about 6 years of IDP and 4 years for education (as long as the hours are earned in accordance with schedule).
Someone with a pre-professional degree in architecture from a U.S. regionally accredited university or Canadian equivalent or any foreign degree that meets NCARB EESA evaluation, would only need to document 7680 training hours.
A person can choose to attain a higher degree more IDP training. Remember, EVERYONE in IDP has some education. They all have to at least have a high school diploma or equivalent to enroll in IDP in the first place.
The additional hours beyond the core hours maybe simply supplemental hours reported as is.
If approved, it would make Oregon's experience path in some way more rigorous than any other state for those without degrees. A person with no degree will likely be at least as competent as someone with an NAAB degree and the 2-3 years of IDP. At the youngest, they would be 18 years old when they start. They would be 36 years old when they complete the longest path if they get the IDP hours reported on a timely basis.
I would recommend BEA to continue development and even reconsider the proposal as it is. We should allow people with other degrees to have a path to licensure and as a boards understand the need of people to move between occupations from other occupations to architecture as well as from Architecture into other occupations. Otherwise, it is sealing the architecture profession only to those as a first degree. It harms the whole reciprocity of those that need to have mobility and these professionals have the same need for mobility as those with an NAAB accredited degree.
I propose a path for initial licensure that actually reasonably allow people to get the initial comprehensive training to get licensed by experience. Currently, someone without a degree would have to undergo 8 or 9 years of experience for initial licensure in the neighboring states of California and Washington. Then an additional 10 years for reciprocity.
At least at this point, the goal is more to establish and begin a dialog for paths to licensure without an NAAB accredited degree.
Do away with BEA and maybe require a minimum of 3 years of post-licensure experience. It will be up to the states to amend their alternate paths to licensure if they feel they need to require more years of experience than currently required.
My point for OBAE is to establish a dialogue and develop alternate paths for people from different backgrounds to have a path to licensure without necessarily requiring them to attain an NAAB accredited degree even though it would be encouraged.
11,520 hours should be 11,220 hours.
Balkins, you just said you dislike other people and don't care to work for them, so how is it going to help you to convince your state to allow this 8 to 18 years of IDP track? No state is ever going to allow a route to licensing that's based entirely on remote supervision.
I didn't say I don't like people.
I never said to allow route to licensing that's based ENTIRELY on remote supervision but in fact you already can with IDP. Direct supervision allows for remote contact but I'm not suggesting entirely remote contact where people can't meet in person. Direct supervision doesn't require under IDP that the person has to work in the architect's office. They have to be able to regularly meet in person. Oregon already has an established administrative rule regarding that and approving that provide a degree of record keeping in maintained which should already be in practice with anyone. How hard is the trouble to note for precisely 15 seconds that it takes to jot down the time when met, date, and end of in person contact. How hard is it to take notes? Isn't that something you should do even when supervising in-office staff.
Not a hard task to do unless you're incompetent and disorganized.
Anyone with a degree should.
If you read carefully what I was suggesting, we are talking about IDP. I'm not talking about entirely remote. However, remote experience is accepted especially in this computer age driven design process. Hell, you got people doing out in the field project management and other tasks like taking a punchlist and go throughout a site or doing field documenting a building. The architect isn't going to necessarily babysit this the entire time. He or she might be busy meeting with a client. Should this experience count? Sure. Should people hired on contract working with a project that the architect is working on, be allowed IDP training hours doing tasks for the architect. Sure, temporarily hiring someone due to locality of the contracted employee is convenient as long as the architect has the necessary means of communication and oversight. This stuff doesn't need the architect to be within 10 feet of the contract employee at all times. It is legal experience in Oregon. It is acceptable experience in IDP. Sometimes, some work needs more in-person communication.
My point is if you read what I said is I am not going to do 90% of the work so someone else gets 90% of the pay. I said, I don't like people that much to do that.
I'm not suggesting necessarily 8 to 18 years of IDP. It is more like 4 to 18 years and the lower numbers are contingent on education from associates level and higher. 18 years is based on experience only and that being basically IDP.
IDP is not entirely remote experience only. So yes, if I were to proceed with licensure under one of these paths, I would have to be employed by someone be it contracted employment or not. In fact, it is more training hours not years. Years are relative but the proposed rules would be based on training hours not 'years'. The number of years would depend on several factors, education and how hard someone works. So if someone works 60-120 hours a week, they are likely to work through the training hours in less time than someone who works only at 35 hours. It can take longer if you work at a slower pace.
Supplementary experience would likely need to be under an architect or engineer as you can't get all those experience under things like EPC.
It is more to begin a discussion and fine tune the details. I'm not suggesting experience as a building designer being counted. It isn't normally counted in any of the states so it isn't being suggested here. I may propose increasing the amount of time allowed under an engineer aside from that under an architect. So currently ~1870 hours can be under an engineer in Experience Setting O, we can allow the maximums to be multiplied proportionally as well as the minimum number of hours required to be under a registered architect under setting A.
My proposal isn't really benefiting me that much aside for allowing a path for initial licensure in Oregon without having to get licensed out of State, then practicing 10 years outside that state just to get licensed in this state which is a ridiculous burden if you don't live close to California border. It is ridiculous to do that. However, I'm not proposing a effortless path for me. I basically would have to earn 11,220 training hours of IDP or 22,440 training hours dependent on completing a bachelor's degree or not completing one and just an associate. Two Associates does not equal a bachelor's as far as the proposed rule is concerned. Transcripts would be required and that would determined the requirements. If I was designing it for me, I would have made it more easier for me.
ALL applicants/candidates for Licensure will still have to pass the ARE and other state exams.
It is a path that allows more people to pursue licensure but it doesn't make it easier.
You try to show me a person who been working on IDP earning over 11,000 hours to over 15,000 hours without an NAAB accredited or architecture degree, who isn't competent to practice architecture.
In fact, some states gives some credit for path to licensure and total time would still be less than what I propose.
I'm proposing probably the lengthiest and most rigorous experience path to licensure than any other state.
I'm proposing a fairly rigorous path. Reality is these IDP hours may take 25% longer number of years for some. It can take possibly 12 years to complete IDP that may normally take 9-10 years to complete. Where am I suggesting an easy cakewalk for licensure.
"I don't like other people that much. I don't like you that much."
Do you ever think about how you're ever going to find any architect to agree to supervise your IDP - remote or not - once they google you? Why would anybody ever put up with your attitude?
What attitude?
Like I should give a hoot about Sponty? It isn't like he is offering a job.
or
Not willing to be some else's slave working for peanuts?
I've done enough charity work in my life that I don't need to be doing charity work for a for-profit business employer.
I hate to tell you this, NEWSFLASH, everyone with leadership qualities has an attitude unless they are a bunch of pansies who can't think for themselves.
Sorry but part of being a free-will independent minded person including being a leader, attitude is part of it. It goes with the territory to stand up against bullshit and other assholes.
Business is war and the timid is eaten for breakfast by the cutthroats. If you don't have an attitude, and tenacity, your through. You can't succeed at anything.
Regarding your question, are you assuming I am really interested at this point in working for an Architect?
I'm interested in doing my own things not other people's crap. When I'm doing someone else's work (working for someone else such as an architect), it isn't my own thing. I don't have the same passion when it is someone else's thing.
I realize this is an old thread but for anyone interested in the NCARB BEA certificate, NCARB changed it as of January 2017. For those with 4 year architecture degrees (pre-professional, BED, etc...), the process appears to be much more straight forward and the fees have been substantially reduced. Based on info on the NCARB website (as of March 2017), I found that 44 states accept the BEA. The states that didn't were NY, WI, MI, MN, ID and MS and looking at state requirements for these 6, it looked like 4 of the 6 allowed an alternate path to the education requirement, meaning you can probably get registered there but it would take a little extra work than typical NCARB reciprocity. I believe the sticklers for the degree were MI and MS.
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.