1. No, it just takes a bit of knowing that you haven’t learned much at uni in terms of relevant information and understanding that you are the lowest man on the totem pole. Also needing to find the right balance of speed and precision.

2. Haven’t had any formal mentorship or manual, just thrown into the deep end and learned how to function in an office environment. Have had positions in the past where I was the only employee besides the architect so working in a smaller office environment lends itself better to having general discussions about projects so that served somehow like a mentorship I suppose.

3. Depends what the question is. Usually if it is a software related problem, then I spend some time trying to figure it out on my own rather than wasting a more senior person’s billable hours. If it’s a project-related question that will otherwise result in having to redo my work, I ask the next senior person up from me.

4. Spend more time trying to understand how things go together and in general the construction process, rather than focusing on drawing lines in cad without knowing what exactly those lines represent.

The advice above is right on. I would add, in my opinion, schools are not established to make you ready and able to jump into the profession. The good schools teach students the language, history, rudimentary design processes, and general techtonics of architecture, some better schools teach a bit more. The worst thing the schools do is to focus on "architects" rather than architecture. For some reason the professors love to glorify past or current architects and hold them up as icons. It's nonsense. Each student, if he or she wants genuine success in the profession, in a big or small way, must forge ahead on their own individual path. What student's seem to inherent in the scholarly process is inflated ego - I know I was one of them. Many believe they are destined to be the next Le Corbusier, Tschumi, Gehry-Goldberg or some other post modern icon. Sad, sad! As the response above alluded to, and I believe it absolutely true, the young architect is best to start at the bottom. If that be a CAD jockey, then so be it. The key is patience and to do your best at any position, and don't just merely copy imitate, think things through: What is the reason behind it. Whatever you are tasked to do, do your utmost, and with contemplative reasoning and deliberate study of all things architecture, you will succeed. Humility comes before honor. Don't worry about licensure; that will take care of itself. Simply register with NCARB and count your intern hours. If it takes a decade or more, so what! What we need in this country are a few more dedicated and principled architects. Architecture is a noble profession, don't let anyone convince you otherwise. A good architect is up there aside the honest attorney, the capable doctor, and any other esteemed and valued professional. One final note: Much of your internship, depending on your education, will be in washing off the mud of pedantic "isms" and "its". Architecture is a pure art, the Art of Sheltering, in response to a real functionality. Good architects are self taught and never cease learning..., 

For the record, there are some of us who never desired to be the next starchitect. Sigh.

1. Yes, being surrounded by failed starchitects was pretty miserable. Limit your time at the office and continue to learn about everything else in life so you don't get to be old and have nothing to show for it except some buildings. 2. Don't have a mentor. Never had formal training. It was 100% throwing stuff at me and me figuring it out by trial and error. Some mild hazing. My peers were great though, so I give them credit for mentoring. 3. Any way that gets me there. I read a lot, so usually books. 4. Learned more technical aspects and cared less about impressing the studio instructors.

Thanks all for your input-