call yerself a project manager. thats what i do. i had architectural intern on a resume and in an interview once, a design partner who was an interior designer, asked me "so, what's an intern architect?" this profession is screwy. cant even get the names coordinated.

Yeah, not only doesn't 'intern' sound good, it's not descriptive. Were you an intern secretary, tech person, cad monkey.

I typically use 'graduate architect'. Its accurate and sounds impressive (at least at 1am in a bar).

this whole "intern" business is stupid and embarrassing. an "internship" was what myself and classmates would do during summers in undergrad (and even high school) when we worked primarily for experience and nominal (if any) wages.

in almost any other profession, nobody over the age 22 would be called an intern. by comparison, i remember a good friend of mine from undergrad who was a communications major. after about a year and a half on his job as a computer consultant he was promoted to "senior consultant." not a bullshit title either, his work actually warranted it but its annoying to see your (occasionally dipshit) friends get considerable more respect than you with about have the effort.

i also strongly feel the the "intern development program" should be renamed "architect development program" since we're trying to develop architects, not interns. and we should do as much as possible to reinforce the notion that architects are the beneficiaries of advanced training (i.e., master's degrees) beyond the expectations of the educational requirements for many other jobs/professions (e.g. engineers, computer consultants, etc.)

calling full time workers who are thirty years old with multiple college degrees and years of experience "interns" because they haven't become registered yet is denigrating bullshit...pure & simple.

personally, i always refer to myself as an architect even though it isn't technically true yet.

and since it was asked, i do see the term "intern architect" used quite a bit here in the midwest for job descriptions.

good point puddles. i work in an office that also has engineers. the "intern" engineers are technically called engineers in training. perhaps the aias etc should mount a campaign for an offical name change.

I am under the impression that the older staff is quite content with calling unlicensed architects 'interns'. I don't see a change anytime soon for these reasons. And typically if an intern is bothered by it, they just get their license ASAP and don't look back. If there is a campaign to change this ridiculous title, I'll chip in whatever I can. Meanwhile, I think I am going to stop calling myself an intern already. My self esteem just went up 2 points!

puddles, what bugged me most was that a recent graduate interior designer was called 'management' and treated as such in my last firm (because she was head of her department was the rationale), even though the arch interns helped her out all the time and gave her direction and guidance and she worked on our projects for us. our recent graduate graphic designer was called 'marketing director' too! Even though the arch interns checked over his stuff and gave him stuff to do. Both of these people continuously asked why the arch interns weren't allowed to go to firm meetings (as they were), not meet with clients, why we were called interns, etc. There was no answer given, it was largely ignored and dismissed as "that's just the way it is".

I am in the midwest, and the friend who brought this to my attention is on the west coast, so I AM wondering if it is a regional thing.

As far as the engineers I worked with, they had EIT on their business cards, but they called themselves, and the firms called them, engineers anyways.

To be honest.. you can say whatever you want.. but the places youve worked and the lenght of time youve worked there will tip anyone off to what you are...

if you dont have a license.. you are an intern.. if you have 2 years of experience and you put "project manager" theyre arent going to believe that they can hire you, give you 80K a year and let you handle a project by yourself...

so.. the name thing to me is a moot point..

its somewhat funny to review resumes and look at all the verbal gymnastics applicants put forth to try and imporve the image of what they do...

just be honest.

if youre licenses. say architect. if youve worked a long time. you can say senior architect/designer.

if you are still new. say intern architect..


then let the rest of your resume, school, places of employment, rpojects worked on etc.. do the talking.

some days back there was a thread in which people without arch. licenses (and hence interns, be they 40 or 50 years old) called themselves architects. and they were being pounced upon by our dear architect community.
I, for one have a masters degree, dont have a license and dont see myself working towards it, and my company has me labeled as a 'designer' on my visiting card. I would never call myself an 'intern architect', just because i think its a stupid term the old farts at the AIA have coined and i dont conform to it.
And for the record, I will call myself an architect even if i dont ever get a license, and lets see what anyone can do about it....

way to stick it to them sameolddoctor....youll show those jerks.. no way are you going to learn more and try to get yourself a license.. youll call yourself whatever you want....im surprised you even succumbed to those jerks by going to grad school.. i mean. really.. why fucking waste your valuable time right? you didnt really need it...and it just wasted your money... you shoulda started calling yourself an architect right when you figured that was what you wanted to do..

fuck it.. im a doctor... no way am i going to let those pricks at the AMA tell me im not..i went to undergrad and read a few books on first aid whil ei was in scouts.. so. im a doctor.

hotsies, i went to grad school, because i felt that would make me a better architect, ... so i surely know what i am doing.actually to inform you, Tadao Ando never went to arch. school.
I feel that taking the are will not improve me as a designer, and hence i want to make my stance against it.
by that time you go fuck yourself, take another architecture license and call yourself a doctor...but then you will have to actually practise medicine...jackass

ando never went to grad school?!??!! holy fucking shit. man... i never knew that...
wow... you know i think i read somewhere that einstein never finished high school and he was pretty fucking smart too.. maybe we should just stop requiring anyone to finish high school..

anyhow back to ando.. drop me an email when you turn into a great architect.. ill buy some of your books and put them on my shelf next to the ando ones.

okay

great. thanks.

Just saw a lecture by ando. Did you know that he named his dog LeCorbusier. Ha

was the lecture at petsmart?

Strawbeary,

a few of my friends work at corporate firms in the Orlando area and they have "Designer" on their b-cards, although their tasks may not reflect that title.
The explanation my gf's boss gave her was that they aren't allowed, by law, to call her anything with the word "architect" in the title because she is not a licensed architect.

So, by this rational (which I am only indirectly acquainted with), you could be called "Project Manager" or "assistant Project Manager" or "Designer" or "Production Assitant" or "Director of Design and Production" etc...

Same Old Doctor,

One last point.. you mention you are taking your stand against sitting for the ARE because you feel it wont make you a better designer?

I cant think of one test Ive taken that through taking the exam has made me better at something.. tests are only to gauge your ability... the point of them it toestablish a baseline credibility... if you arent taking the exam, its mostly because of laziness and your fear you might fail.. not because you have a moral opposition to the exam.

ouch

hotsies,really... tests gauge ability? thats so b.s.. tests only 'test' your test taking ability and ability to remember marginally usefull information.
i know way more 'unlicensed' architects who know tons more than all the licensed architects i know put together, and they don't get licensed because it is more about the 'hassle' with ncarb/aia, and the fact they know they are indespensible to getting a project built/managed and so do the 'architects' that work with them.
the term 'architect' is just a b.s. term, kept closely gaurded by persnickity aia'ers for god knows what.
designer sounds better anyways.

well ... let's get back to strawberry's original question

it might help to remember that, as a matter of law, the term "architect" means something specific ... i.e. that the person using it as a personal descriptor holds a valid state license somewhere

(okay, before you jump on me, i realize there are many people in other industries calling themselves 'information architects' and similar titles ... my comments are focused on the building design industry and i have no influence over usage elsewhere)

in my state, the title "Intern Architect" is verboten; the state board prefers "Architectural Intern" ... to be sure, it's splitting hairs, but there it is

beyond that, it also might help to consider that any prospective employer who exercises any meaningful level of due dilligence is going to ask for some references and will take the time to make the calls. whatever your resume states, there's a good chance that your prospective employer will actually find out what you've been doing in your prior jobs ... that information is much more important than whatever you call yourself ...

in my view, it's okay to try to spin your experience in a positive manner ... it's death to distort your actual level of responsibility way beyond reality ... you have to use good judgment ...

if you call yourself a pm and you're not really doing that sort of work, you have to weigh the risks of being found out ... as someone who has uncovered out-and-out lies on candidate resumes before, i can tell you that such mis-information is very hard to overlook or understand

as for the "old farts at the aia" most of this terminology actually is driven by 50 different state boards of architectural registration and the empowering legislation related thereto ...

if you will look closely at the most recent aia compensation survey, i believe you will find that the titles adopted by aia for that purpose stop using the term "intern" after 3 years of experience and start using the term "architect" for licensed architectural graduates and "designers" for unlicensed architectural graduates

again, O+... fine.. but in my experience, ive never seen a convincing reason why NOT to become licensed. there are no projects you can get without a license that you cant get with one, but thee are projects you can get with a license that you cant get without one.. you also dont have to explain to clients why you arent licensed, and you also contribue to the security of the profession.. a few years ago i was buying a dog. i dont know much about dogs or dog breeders, but it made me more comfortable to get my dog from an AKC registered dog breeder...

i can only imagine that a prospective client would feel a similar comfort in getting an architect to design his home, instead of someone who says, "no im not techincally an architect, but i went to school for it."

also.. you can effectively see your "architectural" career limited to interior renovations, and small homes in states that allow that to occur.. if youre comfortable with an initial cap on what youll be able to do.. then enjoy..

and as for strawberry.. call yourself whatever you want,, but again.. people usually find out and the penalty for overstating your history will far outstrip the penalty for understating it..

it ain't only ando that don have no licence. shigeru ban never bothered nor did a few others I know who are published regularly in international magazines. In the states I hear greg Lynn never bothered either, and am sure there are many more...

the arguments that hots makes are good ones, but the setup in NA is missing something important...

here in japan there is no need for architects to go to school to get a licence. as long as they can pass the exam they are in, needing only to show that they worked x number of years. alternatively, if you have a master's degree there is no need for experience, and most of the famous folk out here did just that, passing what amounts to a technical exam without any experience whatsoever. that basline established they then go on to find small jobs and learn the real business of architecture which i can assure you from experience they generally have not got a single clue about. they understand contract obligations but have never made one, never drawn a cd set and never met a client or a contractor. BUT they learn it quick enough and all works out fine.

so the licence in this country is not so important in terms of doing good architecture. More so because contractor's are legally responsible for all errors and are in any case not as eager to make coin on change orders, so the partnership is more real than in the US and anyine can learn once in the system, just as tadao did...

the result? hm, i would hazard to say that the more flexible system does produce better architecture than in north america (or more of it anyway). there seems to be more experimentation with structures, typologies, urban planning, and other such good stuff, for better or for worse. In this sense profesional work here can be much like what we were taught in school, constant exploration and testing of ideas. No wonder the good folks at Klein Dytham like it here better than in the UK...the only place that i can think of that compares is holland in the nineties... a country by the way which gives its licences out to architecture students upon graduation, no exam necessary.

hm, winy maas, rem koolhas, shigeru ban, tadao ando, all without the qualifications that the hotsie is so defensive about. some kind of disconnect going on in our business, no?

I am not interested in overstating my abilities. How did that get inferred from my post? Geez-Louise people.

I expect an employer to ask me about my responsibilties on a project and for me to explain them. I find it disgusting that hotsies is drawing conclusions that I am attempting "verbal gymnastics". A resume is a pretty loaded document, the words should be chosen well.

good post, jump.

employers want to know what you have done and what you can do ... everything else is just semantics ... the challenge is to communicate clearly a factual story

It just starts to be a problem when people take examples of architects who havnet recieved their license, or gone to school, and use that as a model for how to be an architect...i never would argue its not possible, but you really do maximize youre odds by going to school and getting a license..there are probably 100x more people whom weve never heard of who havent gone to school or recieved their license that thought theyd be architects and ended up failing..

recieving a license upon graduating master school would be great, but the people whos got that in european schools had a different education and had to spend a year of school interning for someone anyhow, as well as spending a year of school taking a series of difficult exams.. so that ends up being similar to our program here in the US.. except the schools graduate us sooner and letus do the interning and exam taking on our own time instead of while in school..

greg lynn doesnt have his license, but hes pretty quiet lately with the exception of product design for alessi, isnt he? .. so perhaps hes not the model architect to follow. unless you expect to have major support from peter eisenman as you backbone.

we're not really doing a very good job of focusing on strawberrry's question ... can we move the discussion of licensure to another thread ... i've set it up ...

i'd make your title most descriptive of what you do...or leave it off. examples might be project manager, drafter, designer, etc.

leaving off a title - merely listing what you've done, the time you've been engaged at a certain job or in a certain role - should be o.k.

less information on the resume might make room for questions in an interview, allowing you to describe your experience in your own terms.

in ky, as in some other places, as noted above, you're not supposed to use 'architect' unless you're registered and the state board can make registration sticky for you if you have called yourself 'architect'. they also don't like 'intern architect'.