Richard do you have any interest in joining the military?
I don't know about the kickstarter scholarship Beepbeep. The thing is that I've been bumping into Richard on various forums for years, and it just doesn't seem so much like a hard luck story as a story of blowing more than one chance, out of different types of stubbornness.
Carrera I honestly worry that they're giving out too many! But I can't resist the challenge. I have at least six years before I can apply, though, so I'm filling my resume with appropriate work and experiences now.
So that's another good thing about being in the AIA: cheesy as it sounds, it challenges me to keep striving.
Jul 27, 15 9:42 pm ·
·
Beepbeep,
I do plan to finish the B.S. in Geography. It just takes a handful of courses to finish.
I'm just trying to get money together but it is running a little slow and sluggish.
As far as kickstarter goes, you can't used Kickstarter for funding college but you can with some of the other crowdfunding platforms.
As for military, my biggest apprehension is the ISIS affair. Reserve and Guard isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Once the Geography degree is completed, I can proceed with an M.Arch for example.
I would have to do the following:
- Get some money together.
- Get the BS Geography
- GRE test. ( This may depend on the school as some don't require GRE but many do so that's one of those "DEPENDS" )
- Prepare portfolio.
- Apply / Enroll into an M.Arch program.
Note: This is not exactly in sequential order as some stuff can be done in overlap.
Donna, think you're right, my hometown started an Architect of the Year Award, they gave out a few (mostly deserving firm owners with awards) then ran out of candidates, then they just starting giving it to anybody, there down to PM's and spec writers.
Think the AIA keeps one on the straight and narrow, not a bad thing, I just preferred to run serpentine.... good luck.
Ha, the architect of the year kinda pisses me off. Always seems to go (in my recent memory) to the person most active in the AIA, nothing to do with actual architecture.
Actually, that's prob a good reason to join. If you're super active you have a good chance of getting a fancy award and dinner
Seems like the unlicensed worker bees would form their own organization - call it the University Architecture Graduates - and have beer kegs and cook outs and maybe a fun time for a change. It would also give a name to the nameless. Hard to fault calling someone an Architecture Graduate when it is written on their very own diploma hanging on their very own wall.
The "unlicensed worker bees" already have an organization, and it's called being an Associate member of the AIA. They even have their own national committee, activities and meetings throughout the year, and a significant presence at the national conventions.
Funny how the people who complain the most about lack of representation at the AIA are usually the ones who can't be bothered to get involved.
As for membership dues, they're completely free for the first 18 months after graduation (including free admission to the national convention). After that, any employer worth their salt should be reimbursing you for AIA membership dues; this is a pretty standard benefit at most firms. If your firm is too cheap to offer that, then maybe it's time to consider a job change.
I heard “they” are starting to peer in windows to see if you guys are displaying those diplomas, better hang it in the bathroom. The audacity of displaying that word when you’re not licensed, I suppose you have FLW posters hanging in your house too… scofflaw!
I think the term "Architecture Graduate" could and should be used by anyone with a degree in architecture from an accredited university. It would quickly be shortened to "AG". If you said a firm had three architects, five AGs, and two interns you would know immediately that it has three registered architects, five architecture school graduates working on their license, and two college students who have not graduated school yet. The AIA doesn't come into it. I am also thinking the AG's might want their own organization away from the stuffy, dead hand of the AIA.
Speaking from Africa, President Barack Obama knocked Huckabee and Donald Trump, too.
“The comments are part of a general pattern that we’ve seen that would be considered ridiculous if it weren’t so sad,” Obama sad, speaking from Ethiopa. “Maybe it’s just an effort to push Mr. Trump out of the headlines.” Source.
Vol - Well, something unbuilt might be OK....You have to understand, if someone were to walk by your house and see through the window the word architect or architecture, why they would most certainly stop and ask you to design a high-rise, we can’t have that.
hmm. my home is in missouri but my license is in kansas. if i have my architect diploma in at home, where i'm not an architect, does that still mean i end up in pound-me-in-the-ass federal pen?
I think the term "Architecture Graduate" could and should be used by anyone with a degree in architecture from an accredited university.
If you have a degree in architecture you can absolutely 100% use the term "masters of architecture" or "architecture graduate." An earned degree is your property and you have every right to display your property regardless of state laws...you are federally protected... Denying some one claim to such terms would be a clear violation of their property rights and a denial of due process...(this is basically from a lawyers mouth)
Want there a similar case in Colorado some years back? Something involving a councilman who graduated from an arch. school but never graduated. Will have to look, I think the court basically said the above, plus some free speech stuff
Actually, the judge ruled that his use of the term architect was not unlawful. That doesn't make him legally an architect, even though at the end of the article he says that he is. I taught that guy's case to my ProPrac students.
Well, no, Volunteer, I think YOU can spin anything anyway you want to. Colorado Practice Act says this:
(c) Unless licensed pursuant to this part 3, it is unlawful for any person to use any of the following titles: "Architect", "architects", "architecture", "architectural", or "licensed architect". In addition, unless licensed pursuant to this part 3, it is unlawful for any person to use the words "architect", "architects", "architecture", "architectural", or "licensed architect" in any offer to the public to perform the services set forth in section 12-25-302 (6). Nothing in this subsection (2.5) prohibits the general use of the words "architect", "architecture", or "architectural", including the specific use of the term "architectural intern" by an individual who is working under the supervision of an architect and is in the process of completing required practice hours in preparation for the architect licensing examination, so long as those words are not being used in an offer to the public to perform the services set forth in section 12-25-302 (6).*
The ruling in this case was that the guy's use of the term "architect" wasn't being used in an offer to the public to perform the prescribed services. That in no way means that he meets the requirements set forth in the practice act to allow him to use the title.
TL;DR: he's not an architect, but he's not misusing the term when he's describing his educational and experience background in running for office. The judge's ruling was that the Board overstepped its authority in sanctioning him for using the term in the context in which he was using it. That ruling doesn't automatically make him licensed.
*Note that the case is from 2006; Colorado updated their Practice Act in 2013 so it may not even be applicable. What I find most interesting in this act is that Colorado specifically says that graduates of architecture school who are working toward license ARE allowed to call themselves "architect" as long as it's not in solicitation of business. I don't know how many states now say that, but I'm glad they do.
But Donna, if you are running a design firm...for arguments sake lets say interior design (I am not an interior designer btw) and you let clients know that you have an M-arch if they ask about your background/education...you hang the diploma in your office...you list it on your webpage...etc...you 100% have the right to do so because the degree conferred is your property and to limit your claim to it would be a violation of several constitutional rights...You guys are conflating legislation with Constitutional LAW...legislation is not always constitutional and it does get challenged and changed very often. I will proudly display my degree that I earned and paid for...If the state has a problem I will continue to display it...If they try to legally stop me I will fight them and likely win. I will not represent myself as an Architect because I am not licensed and I am an honest person...but I will display my degree and convey my educational experience because it is true and it is relevant to my current skill set...simple. People need to challenge laws that are believed to be unjust. That is how societies evolve.
The AIA naysayers, quick question; do you regard, as one of your responsibilities, as a professional, advocacy for the profession? If so, how? If not, why?
The AIA naysayers, quick question; do you regard, as one of your responsibilities, as a professional, advocacy for the profession? If so, how? If not, why?
That is a loaded question. First, you are assuming that "naysayers" identify themselves as part of the profession of "architecture." Even if they do, or would like to, that has been made impossible by the title disputes and the stance that ncarb and the AIA have taken. The profession clearly does not want to be inclusive for economic, personal, or political reasons. Why should there be any loyalty to a profession that one is excluded from? Aside from that, I believe in advocating for the discipline of architecture. These are 2 very distinct things. The profession is a little over 100 years old, the discipline is as old as human existence. The profession is fabricated. The discipline is a natural feature of the human species. Should the profession impede upon the progress of the discipline, loyalty should be towards the discipline first and foremost. Secondly, I believe that one should be an advocate for the general state of the built environment, the natural environment, and for the people who inhabit it. The profession of architecture is not aligned with these goals (despite the PR,) because the profession of architecture, similar to a corporation, is primarily concerned with the economic and political benefit of its members.
jla-x, you must not have listened to the podcast wherein I expressed my deep disappointment that NCARB's Future Title Task Force didn't find that loosening the use of the term "architect" to allow graduates of accredited programs to use it would be beneficial to the profession (and hopefully put an end to ridiculous arguments like this one).
To be clear: I think NCARB should lead the way and all states should follow that anyone with an accredited degree - whether or not they are "pursuing licensure" - should be allowed to identify themselves as an architect, and those who want to pursue and achieve licensure would then be recognized legally as a Registered Architect. IMO this would be beneficial to both registered and unregistered members of our profession.
That didn't come to pass and isn't likely to, nationwide, any time soon. So for the time being, if you don't hold a license, you can't use the term "architect" to describe the professional services you offer. (In some states you can offer "architectural design" or similar, but you can't use the title architect unless you are one.)
And to follow up: just get the fucking license already, jla-x! You're clearly smart enough and have stamina enough to do it, given how passionately you argue against it here!
It's not "exclusionary" to require practitioners to meet a minimally acceptable level of skill to perform certain tasks, in any profession! NO ONE is stopping you from getting the license, except you.
Donna, I did listen to the pod cast. I agreed with you on just about everything you said. I am talking specifically about the posts above regarding ones ability to represent their degree/education and how ones right to do so is not up to ncarb or the state...it comes down to basic and fundamental liberties...
i am fine with everyone taking on the liability i take on....have at it......i dont join groups so i can't say i give a fuck about the AIA
Jul 31, 15 11:14 pm ·
·
jla-x,
It is simple. You have the right to say you have a college degree in architecture. You do not have the legal right to say you are something that you are not. This isn't just architectural licensing laws that you contend with but other parts of the larger body of law that forms the legal system of our nation, our states and our local governments.
Remember, fraud is fraud and violates the law. The licensing board cases Donna reference only depicts a case law example where the licensing boards themselves have limitations in and of themselves. They do however have authority to report fraud to judicial authorities of he court and move the case of fraud. This is something that hasn't been exercised much by licensing boards as of yet. Reasons are across the board but this doesn't mean a case can't be brought before the courts. Quasi-judicial findings in a licensing board can be moved to courts as sufficient evidence necessary for further inquiry of investigation by judicial authorities.
AIA
He's 34 or 35 - what's the cut-off to enlist in the military?
Raised it to 39 I think...
Richard do you have any interest in joining the military?
I don't know about the kickstarter scholarship Beepbeep. The thing is that I've been bumping into Richard on various forums for years, and it just doesn't seem so much like a hard luck story as a story of blowing more than one chance, out of different types of stubbornness.
Carrera I honestly worry that they're giving out too many! But I can't resist the challenge. I have at least six years before I can apply, though, so I'm filling my resume with appropriate work and experiences now.
So that's another good thing about being in the AIA: cheesy as it sounds, it challenges me to keep striving.
Beepbeep,
I do plan to finish the B.S. in Geography. It just takes a handful of courses to finish.
I'm just trying to get money together but it is running a little slow and sluggish.
As far as kickstarter goes, you can't used Kickstarter for funding college but you can with some of the other crowdfunding platforms.
As for military, my biggest apprehension is the ISIS affair. Reserve and Guard isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Once the Geography degree is completed, I can proceed with an M.Arch for example.
I would have to do the following:
- Get some money together.
- Get the BS Geography
- GRE test. ( This may depend on the school as some don't require GRE but many do so that's one of those "DEPENDS" )
- Prepare portfolio.
- Apply / Enroll into an M.Arch program.
Note: This is not exactly in sequential order as some stuff can be done in overlap.
Donna, think you're right, my hometown started an Architect of the Year Award, they gave out a few (mostly deserving firm owners with awards) then ran out of candidates, then they just starting giving it to anybody, there down to PM's and spec writers.
Think the AIA keeps one on the straight and narrow, not a bad thing, I just preferred to run serpentine.... good luck.
Ha, the architect of the year kinda pisses me off. Always seems to go (in my recent memory) to the person most active in the AIA, nothing to do with actual architecture. Actually, that's prob a good reason to join. If you're super active you have a good chance of getting a fancy award and dinner
Seems like the unlicensed worker bees would form their own organization - call it the University Architecture Graduates - and have beer kegs and cook outs and maybe a fun time for a change. It would also give a name to the nameless. Hard to fault calling someone an Architecture Graduate when it is written on their very own diploma hanging on their very own wall.
The "unlicensed worker bees" already have an organization, and it's called being an Associate member of the AIA. They even have their own national committee, activities and meetings throughout the year, and a significant presence at the national conventions.
Funny how the people who complain the most about lack of representation at the AIA are usually the ones who can't be bothered to get involved.
As for membership dues, they're completely free for the first 18 months after graduation (including free admission to the national convention). After that, any employer worth their salt should be reimbursing you for AIA membership dues; this is a pretty standard benefit at most firms. If your firm is too cheap to offer that, then maybe it's time to consider a job change.
I heard “they” are starting to peer in windows to see if you guys are displaying those diplomas, better hang it in the bathroom. The audacity of displaying that word when you’re not licensed, I suppose you have FLW posters hanging in your house too… scofflaw!
I think the term "Architecture Graduate" could and should be used by anyone with a degree in architecture from an accredited university. It would quickly be shortened to "AG". If you said a firm had three architects, five AGs, and two interns you would know immediately that it has three registered architects, five architecture school graduates working on their license, and two college students who have not graduated school yet. The AIA doesn't come into it. I am also thinking the AG's might want their own organization away from the stuffy, dead hand of the AIA.
Actually Carrera, I do, one of the unbuilt Lake Tahoe cabins.
Donna S said, "By all means volunteer for your local food pantry and bike hub too, but you won't get those industry-specific benefits from them."
Nice. Snarky + makes an excellent point.
I'm channeling Obama:
Speaking from Africa, President Barack Obama knocked Huckabee and Donald Trump, too.
“The comments are part of a general pattern that we’ve seen that would be considered ridiculous if it weren’t so sad,” Obama sad, speaking from Ethiopa. “Maybe it’s just an effort to push Mr. Trump out of the headlines.” Source.
ZING!
Vol - Well, something unbuilt might be OK....You have to understand, if someone were to walk by your house and see through the window the word architect or architecture, why they would most certainly stop and ask you to design a high-rise, we can’t have that.
Careera, The SWAT teams are forming outside my house right now. They are being led from the rear by a functionary from AIA headquarters.
Sorry, can't help you because I'm licensed.
hmm. my home is in missouri but my license is in kansas. if i have my architect diploma in at home, where i'm not an architect, does that still mean i end up in pound-me-in-the-ass federal pen?
Yes. Unless you send $15,263.49 to the NCARB. I would wire it quickly just to be safe.
oh noes. can you give me the bank information and i will sent it right to you vol. i mean, i will send it right to ncarb.
I think the term "Architecture Graduate" could and should be used by anyone with a degree in architecture from an accredited university.
If you have a degree in architecture you can absolutely 100% use the term "masters of architecture" or "architecture graduate." An earned degree is your property and you have every right to display your property regardless of state laws...you are federally protected... Denying some one claim to such terms would be a clear violation of their property rights and a denial of due process...(this is basically from a lawyers mouth)
Want there a similar case in Colorado some years back? Something involving a councilman who graduated from an arch. school but never graduated. Will have to look, I think the court basically said the above, plus some free speech stuff
Discounted access to documents? It all balances out.... your dues cover the cost of the documents.
Shuellmi,
How does someone graduate from arch school but never graduated? Elaborate what you meant?
http://archrecord.construction.com/archrecord2/work/0611/johnson.asp# Basically the courts think free speech is pretty important
Sorry, typing hurriedly on my phone..... Graduated but never got licensed is what I meant to write
Ok. Makes sense... now.
http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20060510/NEWS/105100034
What I want to know is how an architect wannabe can afford to live in Aspen?
Actually, the judge ruled he was an architect, no 'wannabe' about it.
Actually, the judge ruled that his use of the term architect was not unlawful. That doesn't make him legally an architect, even though at the end of the article he says that he is. I taught that guy's case to my ProPrac students.
The judge's ruling seems very clear to me. Guess anything can be spun anyway you want it. Did the architect in question receive any sanctions?
Well, no, Volunteer, I think YOU can spin anything anyway you want to. Colorado Practice Act says this:
(c) Unless licensed pursuant to this part 3, it is unlawful for any person to use any of the following titles: "Architect", "architects", "architecture", "architectural", or "licensed architect". In addition, unless licensed pursuant to this part 3, it is unlawful for any person to use the words "architect", "architects", "architecture", "architectural", or "licensed architect" in any offer to the public to perform the services set forth in section 12-25-302 (6). Nothing in this subsection (2.5) prohibits the general use of the words "architect", "architecture", or "architectural", including the specific use of the term "architectural intern" by an individual who is working under the supervision of an architect and is in the process of completing required practice hours in preparation for the architect licensing examination, so long as those words are not being used in an offer to the public to perform the services set forth in section 12-25-302 (6).*
The ruling in this case was that the guy's use of the term "architect" wasn't being used in an offer to the public to perform the prescribed services. That in no way means that he meets the requirements set forth in the practice act to allow him to use the title.
TL;DR: he's not an architect, but he's not misusing the term when he's describing his educational and experience background in running for office. The judge's ruling was that the Board overstepped its authority in sanctioning him for using the term in the context in which he was using it. That ruling doesn't automatically make him licensed.
*Note that the case is from 2006; Colorado updated their Practice Act in 2013 so it may not even be applicable. What I find most interesting in this act is that Colorado specifically says that graduates of architecture school who are working toward license ARE allowed to call themselves "architect" as long as it's not in solicitation of business. I don't know how many states now say that, but I'm glad they do.
Or, here's a better TL;DR version: A guy saying he is something to a newspaper reporter doesn't mean he actually is.
But Donna, if you are running a design firm...for arguments sake lets say interior design (I am not an interior designer btw) and you let clients know that you have an M-arch if they ask about your background/education...you hang the diploma in your office...you list it on your webpage...etc...you 100% have the right to do so because the degree conferred is your property and to limit your claim to it would be a violation of several constitutional rights...You guys are conflating legislation with Constitutional LAW...legislation is not always constitutional and it does get challenged and changed very often. I will proudly display my degree that I earned and paid for...If the state has a problem I will continue to display it...If they try to legally stop me I will fight them and likely win. I will not represent myself as an Architect because I am not licensed and I am an honest person...but I will display my degree and convey my educational experience because it is true and it is relevant to my current skill set...simple. People need to challenge laws that are believed to be unjust. That is how societies evolve.
The AIA naysayers, quick question; do you regard, as one of your responsibilities, as a professional, advocacy for the profession? If so, how? If not, why?
That is a loaded question. First, you are assuming that "naysayers" identify themselves as part of the profession of "architecture." Even if they do, or would like to, that has been made impossible by the title disputes and the stance that ncarb and the AIA have taken. The profession clearly does not want to be inclusive for economic, personal, or political reasons. Why should there be any loyalty to a profession that one is excluded from? Aside from that, I believe in advocating for the discipline of architecture. These are 2 very distinct things. The profession is a little over 100 years old, the discipline is as old as human existence. The profession is fabricated. The discipline is a natural feature of the human species. Should the profession impede upon the progress of the discipline, loyalty should be towards the discipline first and foremost. Secondly, I believe that one should be an advocate for the general state of the built environment, the natural environment, and for the people who inhabit it. The profession of architecture is not aligned with these goals (despite the PR,) because the profession of architecture, similar to a corporation, is primarily concerned with the economic and political benefit of its members.
Lunacy, but have at it, I'm sure your attorney will appreciate your steadfast, and uncompromising attitude.
What exactly is "lunacy?"
"No person should be deprived of property without due process..."
?+!
jla-x, you must not have listened to the podcast wherein I expressed my deep disappointment that NCARB's Future Title Task Force didn't find that loosening the use of the term "architect" to allow graduates of accredited programs to use it would be beneficial to the profession (and hopefully put an end to ridiculous arguments like this one).
To be clear: I think NCARB should lead the way and all states should follow that anyone with an accredited degree - whether or not they are "pursuing licensure" - should be allowed to identify themselves as an architect, and those who want to pursue and achieve licensure would then be recognized legally as a Registered Architect. IMO this would be beneficial to both registered and unregistered members of our profession.
That didn't come to pass and isn't likely to, nationwide, any time soon. So for the time being, if you don't hold a license, you can't use the term "architect" to describe the professional services you offer. (In some states you can offer "architectural design" or similar, but you can't use the title architect unless you are one.)
And to follow up: just get the fucking license already, jla-x! You're clearly smart enough and have stamina enough to do it, given how passionately you argue against it here!
It's not "exclusionary" to require practitioners to meet a minimally acceptable level of skill to perform certain tasks, in any profession! NO ONE is stopping you from getting the license, except you.
Jla-x, the official drink of the NCARB is Kool Aid, just mix in some vodka and drink it.
Donna, I did listen to the pod cast. I agreed with you on just about everything you said. I am talking specifically about the posts above regarding ones ability to represent their degree/education and how ones right to do so is not up to ncarb or the state...it comes down to basic and fundamental liberties...
i am fine with everyone taking on the liability i take on....have at it......i dont join groups so i can't say i give a fuck about the AIA
jla-x,
It is simple. You have the right to say you have a college degree in architecture. You do not have the legal right to say you are something that you are not. This isn't just architectural licensing laws that you contend with but other parts of the larger body of law that forms the legal system of our nation, our states and our local governments.
Remember, fraud is fraud and violates the law. The licensing board cases Donna reference only depicts a case law example where the licensing boards themselves have limitations in and of themselves. They do however have authority to report fraud to judicial authorities of he court and move the case of fraud. This is something that hasn't been exercised much by licensing boards as of yet. Reasons are across the board but this doesn't mean a case can't be brought before the courts. Quasi-judicial findings in a licensing board can be moved to courts as sufficient evidence necessary for further inquiry of investigation by judicial authorities.
did you read what I wrote? No one is talking about fraud or using the title...
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.