In the past couple months I took my modeling and drafting skills to the web and earned a handful of projects putting together drawings for owners to submit to their city. My hat goes off for those that have been doing this for a while.
I come to you today to ask, as an unlicensed architect, to what range may I legally work? I am uncertain whether I've stepped on toes or stepped into domain that I'm not licensed to encroach. In other words, with only an associates in architecture, established modeling and drafting skills, and google, what am I entitled legally to do as a freelancer in the world of architecture?
I must develop my understanding of my legal rights because I have a client that would like me to work with his contractor by responding to RFIs (I think that's the phrase) upon approval of the drawings for permits. I'm looking to design and create good drawings. Not looking to get myself into a situation I'm not licensed to handle. Though I desire to put together good buildings with the proper team, I'm aware I have my limitations and should be careful of how much I bite. Please advise.
No such thing as an unlicensed architect. You either have a license, or you call yourself some combination of designer'something. The legality of what you can do will vary by location. For example, what you describe is not permitted in my area.
Check your state's rules for limitations. Many states limit by project type and square footage. Be very clear with clients on the outset about what services you can and cannot provide. I would also see if there are any licensed architects in your area who would be willing to take on construction administration duties for your projects, and would appreciate the referrals. At least, if you can't personally provide construction administration services, you can refer them to someone who can.
Don't call yourself an architect - in the US it's illegal unless you are licensed. You can get in big trouble for doing this - like not being allowed to ever become an architect and some big fines.
As others have said it depends on the state. Since you're doing work online I personally would go by what the most restrictive state laws are.
In general, a person in your position is only allowed to do drafting and design for single family homes up to 3,500 square feet (verify that number). Any other drafting work and building permits must be supervised by an architect licensed in the state the project is being built in. The exact project types and areas will differ depending on the state and or county.
Regardless I would strongly recommend that you create an LLC and get liability and errors / omission insurance.
The fact that you used the term "unlicensed architect" immediately disqualifies you from doing any kind of work that doesn't involve a broom and a mop.
Definitely correct me if I'm crossing the line. Aren't all participants in the architecture industry without an architecture license 'unlicensed architects' that have settled in a 'niche' per say? They just happen to ask for a title that sums up the type of 'squeegee and bucket' work they do?
I'm under the impression that all work in the architecture industry leads up to the architecture. You're either an architect in one area of architecture or you're an architect in another area of architecture but and architect none the less in the architecture world. I grew up with the belief that if you draw a building you're an architect. If you put together the building you're an architect. Sure, 'architect' is used interchangeably and vaguely at times. Perhaps, I'm thinking of a 'master architect'.
Snort and spit on my post all you like if you must but please point me in the right direction of titles used now a days and their descriptions to better understand their part in the whole.
agreed; other fields don't have this stupid problem, which all stems from our over legalized professional world, and the historical move to disassociate architects from the building industry and align themselves more with the professional class (i.e. this is all a deliberate decision by a few people in charge).
would you not call an employee of a licensed electrician, who is unlicensed themselves, also an electrician?
Legally an architect is responsible for the life and safety of the people who occupy the buildings they have designed. The only way in the US and parts of Europe for this life safety to be somewhat regulated and remotely guaranteed is though requiring architects to meet a minimum standard of knowledge and care in the profession. This is done through licensture.
square., I’m pretty sure electricians have to show competency to be licensed through experience, education, and examination in order to use the title. An unlicensed employee of an electrician is usually called an apprentice or a trainee. Once they are licensed or certified they use the title. Your state’s laws may be different. Most licensed professions will be similar. Perhaps the unique part about architects is how much we enforce it because of our enormous egos.
so when an apprentice introduces themselves to someone, they don't just say "i'm an electrician"?
i'm not arguing the need for licensed architects (though i think the way that this should be done needs to be seriously revamped). what i'm arguing that it's absurd that people who work for architecture firms with no license, even those with 10+ years experience, can't call themselves even "unlicensed architects."
Ooooh, those poor graduates and their feelings are hurt. Want the title? Then pass your licensing exams. I'm not a stamp collector, do I have to identify as a non-stamp-collector?
if you don't see the connection between your favorite punching bag, new graduates (sad if you ask me)/ architecture culture at large, who tend to glorify design/starchitecture, and the history of professionalization, then you're not seeing the woods through the trees. i see people complain over and over on this forum about the lack of connection to the building industry- if you take a look at the bigger historical picture, the overemphasis on design didn't magically appear. it was the direct result of those in charge of the profession deciding to disassociate with the building component and insult themselves both legally and culturally.
I don't see the issue. Why water down the licensing process by giving a pseudo title to fresh grads just to make them feel like they accomplished something with their 100k art degree?
sure, just wait. specialization will only get worse. "i'm a pre-certified apprentice job co-captain at an architectural firm." i think my broader point about how professionalization alienated us from the building industry is being ignored... but maybe that's too broad for this conversation.
I think that is an entirely different conversation to have. We're discussing licensing, and why you should / shouldn't call yourself an unlicensed architect.
Jun 9, 20 12:41 pm ·
·
square.
i don't see anything wrong with people calling themselves an architectural designer, yet that is also banned, which is just silly. designer is completely generic and vague. might as well refer to one's self as staff or laborer or worker.
another interesting point that someone raised on another thread is that these boards don't seem interested in policing people like liz diller, who gladly calls herself an architect without a license, and instead only seems interested in sending legal notices to young staff for using any word remotely related to architecture.
I believe architectural design is permitted in my area. I'll see if I can hunt down the memo... Intern Architect is the preferred term as per my association (as long as you're paying IDP dues, if not... then be happy with designer)
square., I've had some introduce themselves to me as electrician's apprentices before. It didn't seem to be an issue because 1) it's an easily understood designation to anyone remotely familiar with the process, 2) it's a respectful title, 3) they didn't trip on their ego saying it. I can't say if all electrician's apprentices stick with that title when introducing themselves, but I'd also argue it's not an issue unless they are going after work and misrepresenting themselves.
Where architecture fails in the title game is that we don't have an easily understood and respectful title for aspiring architects, and our egos are too big. I haven't written about the ego issue, but I have written about the easily understood and respectful title issue before:
I can confirm that Intern Architect is the formal title in Canada for non-licensed M.arch grads as long as they maintain good standing in their IDP. How is that not respectful?
Jun 9, 20 1:30 pm ·
·
square.
i agree, that sounds good to me. not allowed in many us jurisdictions, including mine. this is part of the problem- it's completely muddied and uneven, so you get all of this bizarre psuedo-this-jargon-that.
ea- this has nothing to do with my ego (i'm licensed), it's about defining the discipline, and realizing that things like professional licenses and titles have more to do than just health and safety (good things, but which can also be regulated outside of having a license through building codes, inspections, etc.), but also our relationship to other industries and professions. i see more ego from licensed architects who are alot of times more interested in protecting their legalized title and privileged positions than thinking about why we are where we are.
Jun 9, 20 1:47 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
^ I get that. Just trying to add context to my earlier comments.
square., I'm not focused on the ego in general, nor your ego specifically. I only mention it as a potential roadblock to the title issue because I do believe it gets in the way, otherwise people wouldn't care what they are called. I think one of the ways around that would be to address the other issues I raised such as a respectful and easily understood title for aspiring architects (leaving their ego to be as little or as big as it wants to be). I honestly think we agree on more than we disagree on with this issue. Your electrician comparison doesn't really stand up to scrutiny though.
NS, maybe it's different for Canada, but in the US there has been a turning away from the "intern" title by NCARB because of feedback that it was not seen as appropriate for people who are done with school and potentially have years of experience in the profession. For better or worse, the connotation in society of an "intern" does not accurately reflect the status of many aspiring architects. For that reason it's viewed as not respectful, and because NCARB has turned away from it, it could be considered inappropriate. Despite that, it does still exist in model language from NCARB and in some jurisdiction's laws and regulations. My jurisdiction only changed this last year to remove "intern architect" as the appropriate title and now indicates "architectural associate" as appropriate ... which has its own issues.
"I have a client that would like me to work with his contractor by responding to RFIs (I think that's the phrase)"
This statement is a red flag for me - if you're unsure of this terminology, then you're likely not ready to be responding to RFI's. Beyond whether or not you have the technical expertise, you also need to know your legal/contractual responsibilities related to it...
*** which is fine! *** It takes time to learn those ropes, but it requires oversight from someone who's been doing it for a while. It is not something to be trying to figure out on your own.
The phrase unlicensed architect is an oxymoron. The word architect literally means licensed. In general practice, if an unlicensed designer is working at a licensed architecture firm, and therefore a representative of that firm, yes generally speaking the greater team refers to that individual as the ‘architect’. Said individual is representing the licensed architect(s) and it is assumed their actions, direction etc are under the guidance of the licensed person who is signing the drawings. If you are operating alone, which it would seem you are, you are not in any way connected to a licensed professional. With all due respect the fact that you don’t know what an RFI is, speaks volumes about your lack of experience. That’s the exact kind of question a trainee would go back and ask their overseeing architect about, as well as how to respond to one of course.
In regard to the permits you’ve mentioned, who is signing these? Is this just single family home projects?
For those outside of the AEC industry, let’s say at a party or whatever, yeah sure people will say ‘I’m an architect’ and that’s the easiest simplest answer to the common ‘so what do you do?’. Is someone going to sue you for not explaining the lengthy licensure process at a dinner party, of course not who cares.
But if you’re dealing with people in the actual industry in a professional setting, using the word architect to describe yourself implies a minimum level of competency, which you do not possess and therefore is highly misleading. The most notable part of that competency is with regard to life safety of the public, which is why the license thing matters so much.
To another poster’s comment, there is no point in acquiring ‘errors and omission’ insurance if you have no license. You can’t even get said insurance without submitting the details of, gasp, your license.
That’s great you’ve found work, it’s one of the most difficult things to do, in any industry. I suggest you partner up with someone who does have their license so you can do things right and not cost both yourself and your clients expensive or even dangerous mistakes. Search these forums, people have gotten into serious legal issues doing drawings that go to permit without a license. Partly because they have no license and, highly related, because they don’t know what they’re doing, which is something you learn in the course of earning your license.
I’m tired of people bitching on this forum about a license being meaningless. If you’ve actually gotten one or taken any of the tests, you’d realize it’s a lot of information. Could the process be better, sure and I think we ought to improve it. But personally I wouldn’t want to be visiting a doctor or a dentist or a lawyer who hadn’t proved their ability to meet the minimum requirements of their job. Would you want to be driving on the road next to someone who never passed a driver’s license test? Do some unlicensed individuals know a great deal about the profession? Absolutely! But most don’t. And if they do, stop whining and get your damn license.
Thank you RickB for all information. I will the read the pdf.
Jun 10, 20 5:50 pm ·
·
seekingguidance
Thanks again RickB. I've downloaded the pdf and will get to reading it. Sounds like you've been in practice for quite some time now. Would like to learn more about you if there is a way to a page of yours (website, instagram, linkedin). On another note, and maybe I should start a new thread but I'll brief with you here, sounds like the architect already has enough on her plate. Does she need to master BIM in order to execute the construction of the building as a architect/building designer? Maybe all this is in Vitruvius's pdf and please forgive me for the elementary like thinking as I have not been the best student while in school. I just designed what I thought were cool buildings and created them with the tools I had at the time. I didn't intentionally set out to become someone(s) else as I see that is what is necessary to master the craft(s). None the less, thank you for the explanations, resources, and direction.
Also since you’re new here, ignore RickB. He is not licensed and has never held a job in the architectural profession. He is a troll on the forums and has no idea what he’s talking about. Most of the other posters have some experience and several, including me, are licensed.
I'd say getting advice from people who are actually doing stuff without a license, the masters of skimping might point the OP in the right direction on how to pursue. Every other goody two shoes will tell them to do exactly as they did which is expensive, have to get licensed, or work for someone else, get insurance blablabla and all they see is red flags etc. While all OP needs to know is to set up his VPN with a Swedish IP-address and Bob's your U.N.C.L.E.
Architect: Don't listen to architects about this - they are bias and don't know about this - this is what you should do - I should know, I'm an architect.
Chad Chad Chad...you clearly need a shot of caffeine or two. I was initially joking, see my post about beeping RickyB or the Swedish VPN (don't need a license to practice architecture there apparently, Rick will fill you in), but you calling me a hypocrite made me think that I was on to something here. In order to figure out how to legally work without a license, best course of action would simply be to ask people that practice without such a license. All you see is an infringement of your rights as an architect to sign and stamp boring drawings whereas OP just needs to know how to make this work under these conditions during these difficult times. Get off your high horse and help a brother or sister out by letting the skimpers handle this one...
Rando - try harder, maybe one day you'll be a real architect an not just on the internet.
Jun 11, 20 9:45 am ·
·
randomised
I really hope your work will take off again soon Chad. I’m not an architect on the internet like you that has to flash his license around like some form of proof that you are more than a sad little excuse of a glorified cad monkey with a stamp.
aside from the name calling, i tend to sympathize with randomised here a little. i think architecture could use more people (educated in architecture) figuring out how to practice what the world calls architecture, but the licensed gatekeepers call design. again- 2% of licensed architects in the us are black. if you are in favor of the licensing regime the way it is currently structured, you are also in favor of the demographics of licensure.
I don't disagree. I don't care where or how you received your education and / or experience. The process to licensure needs to become more inclusive and universal with alternate paths to licensure that allow people reciprocity. The current system is convoluted and undervalues the alternate paths to licensure.
You're nothing but a pathetic bullyChad Miller, going after people that were not as privileged as yourself and didn't manage to get licensed or graduate or even start architecture school as you did. This is how you used to respond to Rick until I confronted you:
There are plenty of very fine people on both sides of the licensure divide.
I responded that way to to Rick because the advice he was giving was not only bad but incorrect. You're commenting on me calling him out didn't cause me to treat him better. Rick simply started to give accurate advice.
It seems like you have a rather big chip on your shoulder and need to prove something. You also seem to be a bit of stalker. I really don't care though. You're just some anonymous troll on the internet. Try harder.
Jun 11, 20 5:04 pm ·
·
randomised
Well, his background or work experience didn't suddenly change overnight, maybe people don't necessarily need a license to give out "accurate" architecture advice on the internet :-P
Never said they did. The post you quoted Rick was giving advice as if he had experience in the field of architecture - he doesn't. That's why I called him out on it. I don't care where or how you gained your experience or education in architecture. I don't care how or if you obtained a license in architecture. I do care that you aren't full of BS and pretending to have experience and knowledge you don't actually posses (beyond a google search).
Chad, you gave the exact same response "DO NOT listen to this person. They have no experience or education in architecture and have no idea what they are talking about." in another thread about someone taking a potential first project.
Apparently you are somehow envious of people doing things their own way and seriously avert taking chances...missed the opportunity of a lifetime back in the day or something?
That was my response to a user known for being an idiot troll by everyone on this site who was responding to a brand new user.
Try harder.
Jun 11, 20 6:17 pm ·
·
randomised
Yes exactly, you went for the person, the easy target, and not for the comment as others were echoing the exact same sentiment but you didn't dare bully them.
If I recall the thread you're referring too the poster I called out was the first response in the discussion. I made it abundantly clear that I thought the advice was not a good idea to follow and the person that gave it was an idiot with no actual experience in the field of architecture. It never occurred to me to reply to any comment that gave the same advice and tell them they where wrong. I figured the OP could read and it wasn't necessary.
Try harder.
Jun 11, 20 6:28 pm ·
·
randomised
It was the 6th comment. And all you did was make it personal:
"DO NOT listen to this person. They have no experience or education in architecture and have no idea what they are talking about."
That's the one! - sorry about getting the numbering wrong. Rando - I didn't make it personal. Jawknee has no idea what they are talking about.
Jun 11, 20 7:10 pm ·
·
randomised
That first one is not a comment Rick, it's the initial post, therefore the 6th comment is the 7th post.
Jun 12, 20 4:45 am ·
·
randomised
Chad, you did make it personal, there were more people that echoed a similar sentiment to take the commission, dare a little and just go for it...so perhaps in that case JawKnee's advice was valid, positive and supportive of the OP to take that chance. As I said I believe The Brick Whisperer himself never turned down a commission...But you went after the easy target, again, discredit them publicly and unnecessarily as the licensed bully that you are. Does that make you feel good about yourself, to target a young drop-out struggling with all kinds of issues? Congratulations...
Jun 12, 20 4:59 am ·
·
randomised
I don't know if I should listen to you Rick, according to Chad you've never worked in the field of architecture nor any field related to it. (just kidding)
Taking chances and commissions is never without risk, that's why some people are successful and others always look for excuses to not jump into that deep end...but they will never really learn to swim either.
Jun 12, 20 5:50 am ·
·
randomised
And some people spend their entire career or whatever calculating those risks instead, like driving with the handbrake on...and all they end up with are missed opportunities.
What I've never understood is that the ARE is the same regardless of your path to take the exam - it's a metric that all states follow. If you can pass the ARE then why not use that a the only metric? The idea that because you didn't go to an accredited college you can't be licensed in a state shouldn't matter if you passed the ARE. The education you revived may make you a better designer however the ARE isn't testing that.
the ARE is a prohibitive credential. i understand some requirement of apprenticeship (though the NCARB one is quite flawed), but the exams do little to actually make anyone a better architect- they are a bloated benchmark both in terms of the money and time necessary to complete them. architects could still be held accountable by the state without having to take a ridiculous set of exams. again, in general i question the need for a license. if safety is your concern, codes were around long before we were professionalized. marketing, from the article below (note i disagree with the opinion based conclusion at the end), is the origin and reason for perpetuation of licensure:
In the United States, architecture evolved as a highly organized profession when a group of prominent architects, including Richard Morris Hunt, launched the AIA (American Institute of Architects). Founded on February 23, 1857, the AIA aspired to "promote the scientific and practical perfection of its members" and "elevate the standing of the profession."
Interesting. I do think we need to have some standard to gauge if a person is knowledgeable and qualified to be an architect though. I will say I found the ARE rather frustrating because you had to take it in a vacuum of sorts - if you attempted to use your professional experience in some areas you could get the question wrong. Especially in those questions with the dreaded 'which is the most correct'
right. at most, it should be like PEs- one day. open book. in and out and done. not to mention is basically guaranteed to be paid for by your employer (though PEs are being tested on calculations for the most part, something they actually do in their practice so it makes more sense to me). but in general i find a year or two of practice much more valuable than a paper exam.
I found that without several years of well rounded experience there is no way you can pass the ARE regardless of how much you study.
Jun 12, 20 9:41 am ·
·
Wilma Buttfit
I believe I became a better architect by taking the ARE. I struggled with internships though, getting all the experience in the right categories took years and moving out of state/a fresh start. I worked for a firm whose insurance company prohibited non-licensed individuals from being on a job site. Makes it hard to gain experience that way. Worked for another firm who did work from SD to CDs but then 9 times out of 10 the project would get shelved. Then of course there's the "that's nice sweetie, now get us some coffee and a left-handed screwdriver mmk?" A structured practicum would be a MUCH better solution than the current approach of see if you can patch together some understanding based off the scrambled oh-shit, hold on, aw crap, shut up, you suck, I'm sorry, stop asking so many damn questions that nobody knows the answer to would ya ya overacheiver and go sit in your chair and don't get up and don't talk to anyone, just draw ok and draw FAST, FASTER approach we have now.
As problem solvers (supposedly) one would hope that architects could come up with some solutions to the agreed problem that is the licensure process. But alas all that is offered are complaints with no actionable measures for change or improvement.
One move I’ve seen that is a step in the right direction is some technical schools’ recent(ish) commitment to adding ARE materials into the curriculum with the intent to graduate architects with license in hand. Or at the very least prepared to sit for exams. Not sure how far along that pilot group effort with the NCARB is into the process.
I want to make a quick shout out thank you to RickB, Chad Miller, Randomised, and Non Sequitur for your responsive input through out my posts on Archinect.
Additionally, would like to thank all the new users contributing to this post as well.
Please pardon my participation on this post. I'm finding the need to balance between moving forward with my projects and deciphering some of the posts on here (which ones help with my case and which ones are just arguments between users). None the less, I believe it all to be useful as I get a feel for the user's experience in the profession.
The experience of licensed and unlicensed professionals out there working in the real world might not be the same as the sentiments expressed here or on the internet in general.
Jun 13, 20 3:09 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.
License to bite. Am I biting too much? Please advise.
In the past couple months I took my modeling and drafting skills to the web and earned a handful of projects putting together drawings for owners to submit to their city. My hat goes off for those that have been doing this for a while.
I come to you today to ask, as an unlicensed architect, to what range may I legally work? I am uncertain whether I've stepped on toes or stepped into domain that I'm not licensed to encroach. In other words, with only an associates in architecture, established modeling and drafting skills, and google, what am I entitled legally to do as a freelancer in the world of architecture?
I must develop my understanding of my legal rights because I have a client that would like me to work with his contractor by responding to RFIs (I think that's the phrase) upon approval of the drawings for permits. I'm looking to design and create good drawings. Not looking to get myself into a situation I'm not licensed to handle. Though I desire to put together good buildings with the proper team, I'm aware I have my limitations and should be careful of how much I bite. Please advise.
No such thing as an unlicensed architect. You either have a license, or you call yourself some combination of designer'something. The legality of what you can do will vary by location. For example, what you describe is not permitted in my area.
Check your state's rules for limitations. Many states limit by project type and square footage. Be very clear with clients on the outset about what services you can and cannot provide. I would also see if there are any licensed architects in your area who would be willing to take on construction administration duties for your projects, and would appreciate the referrals. At least, if you can't personally provide construction administration services, you can refer them to someone who can.
Don't call yourself an architect - in the US it's illegal unless you are licensed. You can get in big trouble for doing this - like not being allowed to ever become an architect and some big fines.
As others have said it depends on the state. Since you're doing work online I personally would go by what the most restrictive state laws are.
In general, a person in your position is only allowed to do drafting and design for single family homes up to 3,500 square feet (verify that number). Any other drafting work and building permits must be supervised by an architect licensed in the state the project is being built in. The exact project types and areas will differ depending on the state and or county.
Regardless I would strongly recommend that you create an LLC and get liability and errors / omission insurance.
Good luck! I hope this works out for you!
The fact that you used the term "unlicensed architect" immediately disqualifies you from doing any kind of work that doesn't involve a broom and a mop.
What about a squeegee and a bucket?
What about a shovel? Certainly this hole needs to get deeper.
Definitely correct me if I'm crossing the line. Aren't all participants in the architecture industry without an architecture license 'unlicensed architects' that have settled in a 'niche' per say? They just happen to ask for a title that sums up the type of 'squeegee and bucket' work they do?
I'm under the impression that all work in the architecture industry leads up to the architecture. You're either an architect in one area of architecture or you're an architect in another area of architecture but and architect none the less in the architecture world. I grew up with the belief that if you draw a building you're an architect. If you put together the building you're an architect. Sure, 'architect' is used interchangeably and vaguely at times. Perhaps, I'm thinking of a 'master architect'.
Snort and spit on my post all you like if you must but please point me in the right direction of titles used now a days and their descriptions to better understand their part in the whole.
agreed; other fields don't have this stupid problem, which all stems from our over legalized professional world, and the historical move to disassociate architects from the building industry and align themselves more with the professional class (i.e. this is all a deliberate decision by a few people in charge).
would you not call an employee of a licensed electrician, who is unlicensed themselves, also an electrician?
Legally an architect is responsible for the life and safety of the people who occupy the buildings they have designed. The only way in the US and parts of Europe for this life safety to be somewhat regulated and remotely guaranteed is though requiring architects to meet a minimum standard of knowledge and care in the profession. This is done through licensture.
No we call them "sparky's".
square., I’m pretty sure electricians have to show competency to be licensed through experience, education, and examination in order to use the title. An unlicensed employee of an electrician is usually called an apprentice or a trainee. Once they are licensed or certified they use the title. Your state’s laws may be different. Most licensed professions will be similar. Perhaps the unique part about architects is how much we enforce it because of our enormous egos.
so when an apprentice introduces themselves to someone, they don't just say "i'm an electrician"?
i'm not arguing the need for licensed architects (though i think the way that this should be done needs to be seriously revamped). what i'm arguing that it's absurd that people who work for architecture firms with no license, even those with 10+ years experience, can't call themselves even "unlicensed architects."
Ooooh, those poor graduates and their feelings are hurt. Want the title? Then pass your licensing exams. I'm not a stamp collector, do I have to identify as a non-stamp-collector?
if you don't see the connection between your favorite punching bag, new graduates (sad if you ask me)/ architecture culture at large, who tend to glorify design/starchitecture, and the history of professionalization, then you're not seeing the woods through the trees. i see people complain over and over on this forum about the lack of connection to the building industry- if you take a look at the bigger historical picture, the overemphasis on design didn't magically appear. it was the direct result of those in charge of the profession deciding to disassociate with the building component and insult themselves both legally and culturally.
I don't see the issue. Why water down the licensing process by giving a pseudo title to fresh grads just to make them feel like they accomplished something with their 100k art degree?
Square -
apprentice electrician: 'Hi, I'm an apprentice electrician'
intern architect: 'Hi, I'm a designer at an architectural firm.'
'Hi, I'm a job captain at an architectural firm.'
'Hi, I'm an associate at an architectural firm.'
sure, just wait. specialization will only get worse. "i'm a pre-certified apprentice job co-captain at an architectural firm." i think my broader point about how professionalization alienated us from the building industry is being ignored... but maybe that's too broad for this conversation.
I think that is an entirely different conversation to have. We're discussing licensing, and why you should / shouldn't call yourself an unlicensed architect.
i don't see anything wrong with people calling themselves an architectural designer, yet that is also banned, which is just silly. designer is completely generic and vague. might as well refer to one's self as staff or laborer or worker.
another interesting point that someone raised on another thread is that these boards don't seem interested in policing people like liz diller, who gladly calls herself an architect without a license, and instead only seems interested in sending legal notices to young staff for using any word remotely related to architecture.
again, who's interests are being protected here?
I believe architectural design is permitted in my area. I'll see if I can hunt down the memo... Intern Architect is the preferred term as per my association (as long as you're paying IDP dues, if not... then be happy with designer)
square., I've had some introduce themselves to me as electrician's apprentices before. It didn't seem to be an issue because 1) it's an easily understood designation to anyone remotely familiar with the process, 2) it's a respectful title, 3) they didn't trip on their ego saying it. I can't say if all electrician's apprentices stick with that title when introducing themselves, but I'd also argue it's not an issue unless they are going after work and misrepresenting themselves.
Where architecture fails in the title game is that we don't have an easily understood and respectful title for aspiring architects, and our egos are too big. I haven't written about the ego issue, but I have written about the easily understood and respectful title issue before:
Forgot my most recent writing...
I can confirm that Intern Architect is the formal title in Canada for non-licensed M.arch grads as long as they maintain good standing in their IDP. How is that not respectful?
i agree, that sounds good to me. not allowed in many us jurisdictions, including mine. this is part of the problem- it's completely muddied and uneven, so you get all of this bizarre psuedo-this-jargon-that.
ea- this has nothing to do with my ego (i'm licensed), it's about defining the discipline, and realizing that things like professional licenses and titles have more to do than just health and safety (good things, but which can also be regulated outside of having a license through building codes, inspections, etc.), but also our relationship to other industries and professions. i see more ego from licensed architects who are alot of times more interested in protecting their legalized title and privileged positions than thinking about why we are where we are.
^ I get that. Just trying to add context to my earlier comments.
square., I'm not focused on the ego in general, nor your ego specifically. I only mention it as a potential roadblock to the title issue because I do believe it gets in the way, otherwise people wouldn't care what they are called. I think one of the ways around that would be to address the other issues I raised such as a respectful and easily understood title for aspiring architects (leaving their ego to be as little or as big as it wants to be). I honestly think we agree on more than we disagree on with this issue. Your electrician comparison doesn't really stand up to scrutiny though.
NS, maybe it's different for Canada, but in the US there has been a turning away from the "intern" title by NCARB because of feedback that it was not seen as appropriate for people who are done with school and potentially have years of experience in the profession. For better or worse, the connotation in society of an "intern" does not accurately reflect the status of many aspiring architects. For that reason it's viewed as not respectful, and because NCARB has turned away from it, it could be considered inappropriate. Despite that, it does still exist in model language from NCARB and in some jurisdiction's laws and regulations. My jurisdiction only changed this last year to remove "intern architect" as the appropriate title and now indicates "architectural associate" as appropriate ... which has its own issues.
Does anybody have RickB's beeper number?
"I have a client that would like me to work with his contractor by responding to RFIs (I think that's the phrase)"
This statement is a red flag for me - if you're unsure of this terminology, then you're likely not ready to be responding to RFI's. Beyond whether or not you have the technical expertise, you also need to know your legal/contractual responsibilities related to it...
*** which is fine! *** It takes time to learn those ropes, but it requires oversight from someone who's been doing it for a while. It is not something to be trying to figure out on your own.
FYI
FYI
Sploosh!
Are you referencing Pam from Archer? If so I'm a bit flattered and concerned.
total sploosh
Phrasing. Are we still doing that?
Just saying that the information provided is hot stuff ;)
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=phrasing
I never stopped doing phrasing.
In regard to the permits you’ve mentioned, who is signing these? Is this just single family home projects?
For those outside of the AEC industry, let’s say at a party or whatever, yeah sure people will say ‘I’m an architect’ and that’s the easiest simplest answer to the common ‘so what do you do?’. Is someone going to sue you for not explaining the lengthy licensure process at a dinner party, of course not who cares.
But if you’re dealing with people in the actual industry in a professional setting, using the word architect to describe yourself implies a minimum level of competency, which you do not possess and therefore is highly misleading. The most notable part of that competency is with regard to life safety of the public, which is why the license thing matters so much.
To another poster’s comment, there is no point in acquiring ‘errors and omission’ insurance if you have no license. You can’t even get said insurance without submitting the details of, gasp, your license.
That’s great you’ve found work, it’s one of the most difficult things to do, in any industry. I suggest you partner up with someone who does have their license so you can do things right and not cost both yourself and your clients expensive or even dangerous mistakes. Search these forums, people have gotten into serious legal issues doing drawings that go to permit without a license. Partly because they have no license and, highly related, because they don’t know what they’re doing, which is something you learn in the course of earning your license.
I’m tired of people bitching on this forum about a license being meaningless. If you’ve actually gotten one or taken any of the tests, you’d realize it’s a lot of information. Could the process be better, sure and I think we ought to improve it. But personally I wouldn’t want to be visiting a doctor or a dentist or a lawyer who hadn’t proved their ability to meet the minimum requirements of their job. Would you want to be driving on the road next to someone who never passed a driver’s license test? Do some unlicensed individuals know a great deal about the profession? Absolutely! But most don’t. And if they do, stop whining and get your damn license.
Thank you RickB for all information. I will the read the pdf.
Thanks again RickB. I've downloaded the pdf and will get to reading it. Sounds like you've been in practice for quite some time now. Would like to learn more about you if there is a way to a page of yours (website, instagram, linkedin). On another note, and maybe I should start a new thread but I'll brief with you here, sounds like the architect already has enough on her plate. Does she need to master BIM in order to execute the construction of the building as a architect/building designer? Maybe all this is in Vitruvius's pdf and please forgive me for the elementary like thinking as I have not been the best student while in school. I just designed what I thought were cool buildings and created them with the tools I had at the time. I didn't intentionally set out to become someone(s) else as I see that is what is necessary to master the craft(s). None the less, thank you for the explanations, resources, and direction.
I'd say getting advice from people who are actually doing stuff without a license, the masters of skimping might point the OP in the right direction on how to pursue. Every other goody two shoes will tell them to do exactly as they did which is expensive, have to get licensed, or work for someone else, get insurance blablabla and all they see is red flags etc. While all OP needs to know is to set up his VPN with a Swedish IP-address and Bob's your U.N.C.L.E.
Says the architect. Hypocrisy.
things are not only s l o w at your office, maybe you just need some more time to process...
Still a hypocrite if you as an architect are telling someone that only people practicing without a license are worth listening to.
Could also be ironic.
Try harder.
How is it hypocritical to say people practicing without a license might be better suited to answering a question about practicing without a license?
Architect: Don't listen to architects about this - they are bias and don't know about this - this is what you should do - I should know, I'm an architect.
That's not only hypocrisy but irony.
Chad Chad Chad...you clearly need a shot of caffeine or two. I was initially joking, see my post about beeping RickyB or the Swedish VPN (don't need a license to practice architecture there apparently, Rick will fill you in), but you calling me a hypocrite made me think that I was on to something here. In order to figure out how to legally work without a license, best course of action would simply be to ask people that practice without such a license. All you see is an infringement of your rights as an architect to sign and stamp boring drawings whereas OP just needs to know how to make this work under these conditions during these difficult times. Get off your high horse and help a brother or sister out by letting the skimpers handle this one...
Correct Rick. I was trying to help keep the OP out of trouble.
Rando - try harder, maybe one day you'll be a real architect an not just on the internet.
I really hope your work will take off again soon Chad. I’m not an architect on the internet like you that has to flash his license around like some form of proof that you are more than a sad little excuse of a glorified cad monkey with a stamp.
I don't think you're an architect at all. Try harder
I don't know. It's either rando or x-jla I think. To be honest I kind of tune those two out.
If only you did tune me out, you wouldn't be replying to my posts that much Chad and I wouldn't have to school you so much ;)
aside from the name calling, i tend to sympathize with randomised here a little. i think architecture could use more people (educated in architecture) figuring out how to practice what the world calls architecture, but the licensed gatekeepers call design. again- 2% of licensed architects in the us are black. if you are in favor of the licensing regime the way it is currently structured, you are also in favor of the demographics of licensure.
https://ny.curbed.com/2017/1/2...
I don't disagree. I don't care where or how you received your education and / or experience. The process to licensure needs to become more inclusive and universal with alternate paths to licensure that allow people reciprocity. The current system is convoluted and undervalues the alternate paths to licensure.
You're nothing but a pathetic bully Chad Miller, going after people that were not as privileged as yourself and didn't manage to get licensed or graduate or even start architecture school as you did. This is how you used to respond to Rick until I confronted you:
There are plenty of very fine people on both sides of the licensure divide.
I responded that way to to Rick because the advice he was giving was not only bad but incorrect. You're commenting on me calling him out didn't cause me to treat him better. Rick simply started to give accurate advice.
It seems like you have a rather big chip on your shoulder and need to prove something. You also seem to be a bit of stalker. I really don't care though. You're just some anonymous troll on the internet. Try harder.
Well, his background or work experience didn't suddenly change overnight, maybe people don't necessarily need a license to give out "accurate" architecture advice on the internet :-P
Never said they did. The post you quoted Rick was giving advice as if he had experience in the field of architecture - he doesn't. That's why I called him out on it. I don't care where or how you gained your experience or education in architecture. I don't care how or if you obtained a license in architecture. I do care that you aren't full of BS and pretending to have experience and knowledge you don't actually posses (beyond a google search).
Very true. Architects are wrong all the time. Well except for Rando - he/she seems to think they are always right.
Chad, you gave the exact same response "DO NOT listen to this person. They have no experience or education in architecture and have no idea what they are talking about." in another thread about someone taking a potential first project.
Apparently you are somehow envious of people doing things their own way and seriously avert taking chances...missed the opportunity of a lifetime back in the day or something?
That was my response to a user known for being an idiot troll by everyone on this site who was responding to a brand new user.
Try harder.
Yes exactly, you went for the person, the easy target, and not for the comment as others were echoing the exact same sentiment but you didn't dare bully them.
If I recall the thread you're referring too the poster I called out was the first response in the discussion. I made it abundantly clear that I thought the advice was not a good idea to follow and the person that gave it was an idiot with no actual experience in the field of architecture. It never occurred to me to reply to any comment that gave the same advice and tell them they where wrong. I figured the OP could read and it wasn't necessary.
Try harder.
It was the 6th comment. And all you did was make it personal:
"DO NOT listen to this person. They have no experience or education in architecture and have no idea what they are talking about."
That's the one! - sorry about getting the numbering wrong. Rando - I didn't make it personal. Jawknee has no idea what they are talking about.
That first one is not a comment Rick, it's the initial post, therefore the 6th comment is the 7th post.
Chad, you did make it personal, there were more people that echoed a similar sentiment to take the commission, dare a little and just go for it...so perhaps in that case JawKnee's advice was valid, positive and supportive of the OP to take that chance. As I said I believe The Brick Whisperer himself never turned down a commission...But you went after the easy target, again, discredit them publicly and unnecessarily as the licensed bully that you are. Does that make you feel good about yourself, to target a young drop-out struggling with all kinds of issues? Congratulations...
I don't know if I should listen to you Rick, according to Chad you've never worked in the field of architecture nor any field related to it. (just kidding)
Taking chances and commissions is never without risk, that's why some people are successful and others always look for excuses to not jump into that deep end...but they will never really learn to swim either.
And some people spend their entire career or whatever calculating those risks instead, like driving with the handbrake on...and all they end up with are missed opportunities.
.
building codes have done more to keep people safe than requiring architects to be licensed
https://archinect.com/news/article/150202214/princeton-s-monica-ponce-de-leon-to-overcome-injustice-in-architecture-licensure-should-be-eliminated-or-radically-transformed
What if we simply granted reciprocity to all licenses regardless of how they where obtained (traditional and alternative paths)?
What I've never understood is that the ARE is the same regardless of your path to take the exam - it's a metric that all states follow. If you can pass the ARE then why not use that a the only metric? The idea that because you didn't go to an accredited college you can't be licensed in a state shouldn't matter if you passed the ARE. The education you revived may make you a better designer however the ARE isn't testing that.
the ARE is a prohibitive credential. i understand some requirement of apprenticeship (though the NCARB one is quite flawed), but the exams do little to actually make anyone a better architect- they are a bloated benchmark both in terms of the money and time necessary to complete them. architects could still be held accountable by the state without having to take a ridiculous set of exams. again, in general i question the need for a license. if safety is your concern, codes were around long before we were professionalized. marketing, from the article below (note i disagree with the opinion based conclusion at the end), is the origin and reason for perpetuation of licensure:
In the United States, architecture evolved as a highly organized profession when a group of prominent architects, including Richard Morris Hunt, launched the AIA (American Institute of Architects). Founded on February 23, 1857, the AIA aspired to "promote the scientific and practical perfection of its members" and "elevate the standing of the profession."
https://www.thoughtco.com/architecture-become-licensed-profession-177473
Interesting. I do think we need to have some standard to gauge if a person is knowledgeable and qualified to be an architect though. I will say I found the ARE rather frustrating because you had to take it in a vacuum of sorts - if you attempted to use your professional experience in some areas you could get the question wrong. Especially in those questions with the dreaded 'which is the most correct'
right. at most, it should be like PEs- one day. open book. in and out and done. not to mention is basically guaranteed to be paid for by your employer (though PEs are being tested on calculations for the most part, something they actually do in their practice so it makes more sense to me). but in general i find a year or two of practice much more valuable than a paper exam.
I found that without several years of well rounded experience there is no way you can pass the ARE regardless of how much you study.
I believe I became a better architect by taking the ARE. I struggled with internships though, getting all the experience in the right categories took years and moving out of state/a fresh start. I worked for a firm whose insurance company prohibited non-licensed individuals from being on a job site. Makes it hard to gain experience that way. Worked for another firm who did work from SD to CDs but then 9 times out of 10 the project would get shelved. Then of course there's the "that's nice sweetie, now get us some coffee and a left-handed screwdriver mmk?" A structured practicum would be a MUCH better solution than the current approach of see if you can patch together some understanding based off the scrambled oh-shit, hold on, aw crap, shut up, you suck, I'm sorry, stop asking so many damn questions that nobody knows the answer to would ya ya overacheiver and go sit in your chair and don't get up and don't talk to anyone, just draw ok and draw FAST, FASTER approach we have now.
One move I’ve seen that is a step in the right direction is some technical schools’ recent(ish) commitment to adding ARE materials into the curriculum with the intent to graduate architects with license in hand. Or at the very least prepared to sit for exams. Not sure how far along that pilot group effort with the NCARB is into the process.
Hey all!
I want to make a quick shout out thank you to RickB, Chad Miller, Randomised, and Non Sequitur for your responsive input through out my posts on Archinect.
Additionally, would like to thank all the new users contributing to this post as well.
Please pardon my participation on this post. I'm finding the need to balance between moving forward with my projects and deciphering some of the posts on here (which ones help with my case and which ones are just arguments between users). None the less, I believe it all to be useful as I get a feel for the user's experience in the profession.
Thank you all!
Hi RickB,
Just posted a few minutes ago:
https://archinect.com/forum/thread/150202472/quid-pro-quo-structural-for-architecture
I'll be around now and after this episode.
Thank you.
The experience of licensed and unlicensed professionals out there working in the real world might not be the same as the sentiments expressed here or on the internet in general.
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.