Perhaps this is a dumb question but, why would there be drawbacks to becoming refistered at 30?? If I had to estimate the average age when most obtain their license, I would guess it to be somewhere between 25-30.

i got my initial license at age 34; i waited four years to avoid the obvious drawbacks.

not so obvious to me el jeffe. what are the obvious drawbacks?

a propensity towards sarcasm...i guess i didn't need to wait.

Hmmm... What is the average age? I would have said it was 25 - 30 way back before I went to school. Now I would say it is much later. Or maybe 25 - 30 matches a certain type - an architect with a strong desire to set up a office and jump right into local, mostly residential projects?

I am 28. If I pushed I could have it at 30 (as could many of my friends), but I have absolutely no desire at this point.

Well, to answer the question of the thread (I get off track easily!) I would say that today I am given the impression that I (we) am too young or naive to jump into practice. I should watch and learn at a firm, whether small or large, before I could deem myself fit for taking on a project as the architect.

There ARE obvious drawbacks to not getting licensed at 26 or 27, which is probably the average age when you have completed school and IDP, and time for the test-
- you forget stuff you learned in school, and passing the tests is more difficult.
- you give up flexibility- you never know what opportunity might come up IF you are licensed. (kind of like having a passport.)
- It does make a difference to employers- the kind of people who plan and move forward towards licensure are the same ones who are great at managing projects and moving them from idea thru constuction.
- In many firms, you will earn more if you are licensed.
- Just cause you have a license, you don't have to use it! You may not really be ready to practice on your own, but that is completely independent of actually getting a license.

i don't know if there's any real disadvantage to being licensed before the age of thirty.

personally, i'm 29 and still unlicensed. broadly speaking, i've always figured that if i were licensed by the time i was 35, then i'd be in pretty good shape since that would be about the time that i would be ready to commit to a community and seriously consider launching a private practice. as it is, i'm thinking that if i'm fully licensed two years from now (january 2008, i'd be 31) then i'd be pretty pleased with myself. no big hurry in my opinion.

i probably could've gotten IDP, ARE and licensure all wrapped up by the age of thirty if i had pushed harder but after undergrad i spent a few years working in financial sales before deciding to return to architecture, grad school, etc. obviously not the fast track, but i learned a great deal from those experiences and i would encourage others to step outside of the field of architecture for a few years and gain a broader perspective.

also, in my experience, i've met very few people under the age of thirty who are licensed. in fact, only one comes to mind. i would put the age range for licensure at closer to 30-35.

Is this a generation thing? boomers were nearly all licensed by 30.

i'm 32...and just got permission to start taking the tests...i had IDP
finished years ago..but moved between states and figured i had no
idea where i wanted to practice so i'd wait.

many of my fellow classmates are liscensed of have left the profession.
In boston there didn't seem to be a huge push for liscensure..in nyc
it seems to be a focus...not sure why...i intend to try to finish half? the
tests before the end of the year if at all possible...may have to take
some time off during the summer or something.

My new year's resolution is...
- this is the first time I'm writing it down -
to begin taking the exams this year. I'm 25 and will be finished with IDP this summer.

I believe I will earn more respect at work once I'm registered and will quell the "she's too young to [fill-in-the blank with any number of responsitilities]" sentiments.

I'm 30 and 1/2 done. I've practiced without a liscense for 3 years and have over 15 built projects. The only reason I am taking the exam is so that I can exapand my business and do commercial work. As I've mentioned before on posts I see it as a huge waste of time and money.

However, staying on topic, my advice would be to take the exam as soon as you graduate. It gets harder as you get busier with your own work and personal life outside of school.

Oh and do yourself a favor- take them all in quick sucession. I've been dragging mine out for a year now, and it's a royal pain in the ass. You'll take it more seriously too.

keep in mind, the state in which you are seeking to become licensed has a significant effect on the length of the process...currently only a handful of states approve of ARE concurrent with IDP

i echo the notion of taking the exams in rapid succession. ive know several people to devote eighteen weeks to rigorous study (one test every two weeks) and its proven to effective.

i got licensed at 27. took ARE & IDP together -- texas allows one to do that. biggest advantage is you just plain get it over with.

archie, yes it does seem to be a generational thing. "Residential Architecture" magazine had a long article about a year ago about this, in which they had a bunch of NCARB statistics about licensure. They stated that it takes on average 7 1/2 years now between graduation and registration. So, the average newly-registered architect is now in their thirties.

Much of this has to do with the length of time that it takes now to get all of the required IDP units in various categories, and then the annoying wait time for NCARB and the states to "process" paperwork in various stages. For example: I echo the advice to take the exams in rapid succession. But, even though I took the exams in a matter of a few months, it took about a year and a half from the time I sent in my last IDP form until I was actually registered. That's because it took months for my final IDP paperwork to be "processed", then 6 weeks for my record to be "transmitted", then some weeks waiting for my state to authorize me to test... Then once the tests were finished it took my state more than 2 months to process my registration application....

Testing through the few states that allow testing prior to completion of IDP can speed things up.

Right now I'm in the midst of waiting for my NCARB certificate to be processed, so I can apply for reciprocity, so I can do a project in another state. Seven months and counting....

it might a generation thing

my suspicion is that us twenty-somethings move about cities/switch jobs and just plain travel more than many of the older architects i've met did when they were my age. also, the licensure process seems to have become more complicated. combine those things and i wouldn't be the least surprised if the average age of licensure is older than it used to be.

on a related note, i recall reading somewhere maybe a year ago that sociologists are finding that the age of majority for those in the upper middle classes has virtually pushed into the low thirties age bracket. given the longer life spans, i suppose that it's no surprise that the boomers and the older generations are becoming less willing to yield control to the kiddies. whatever, it's just a matter of time.

was 26. passed it in one go. that was when the exam as about 8 parts with a full day draw by hand design exam.

i know lots of folks that were near 40 when they got it.

was 26. passed it in one go. that was when the exam as about 8 parts with a full day draw by hand design exam.

i know lots of folks that were near 40 when they got it.

here is something that was in CAB newsletter;

"I have heard from a number of prominent architects that it is increasingly difficult to hire good architects. That is certainly the experience at my firm.
In looking at the number of newly licensed architects, it is true that we issue fewer licenses than we have in the past. Some intervening forces have been involved, such as the transition to the computerized Architect Registration Examination (ARE) and the economy. But the reality is that we are simply not issuing as many licenses."

-Jeffrey D. Heller, FAIA, California Architect's Board President

i got my license @ 50. if you're going to stick with architecture as an architect, you better get it asap.

Insurance / Liability issues must be high on the agenda today as I know many young architects who are registered but can't do their own thing as they can't get insurance and are then left to do houses / renos. I would find it discouraging to race to get registered and then not be able to practice.

I got mine at age 32 and opened my own firm at 34 but insurance was cheap and not even a problem to get. Now its a bigger deal and I can see lots of young guns just saying forget it.

I've been concerned about hire-ability in small firms as a registered architect. I want to continue to work in small firms where I get great exposure to all aspects of the field, but I'm worried that once I get my license, I will have effectively priced myself out of the small firm market. My thinking is, if it's a two-partner firm with a couple employees, say, then they're not going to want to add another licensed architect into the mix who might have her own idea of design direction/require more design autonomy or whatever than a more junior employee. This may or may not be what would happen with me in reality, of course, but I am worried they would just toss my resume at the first thought of having to share a small office with another licensed architect.

Is anyone else concerned with this, or is it just in my mind? Any experience?

I am 29 right and I am 2/3 of the way there. With a little luck before I turn 31 I should be licensed. I think getting through the IDP requirements are delaying interns from getting their license. Also now that we can a test pretty much whenever, I think it makes the process longer. People get burnout studying for tests or get occupied with other matters. Before the tests switched to computers you would make time to prepare for the tests since you could only take once a year. At least that what I have heard from people that took test back then.

These are the exact type of things that are on my mind as well: insurance, wanting to stay or get into a smallish firm, networking to start up own firm, family vs study time etc.. I'm still aiming for 30-31 to get licensed.

Thanks for the boost everyone.

received my license at 28, then went to grad school (one of the better manoeuvres by this dumber-than-your-average-bear).
a prof advised me to do it that way knowing i needed a dose of reality - a lot of bright people around me now are stressed about it, while i can continue interesting pursuits.

snowi, i am planning on doing the same. Glad to know it was a good decision for you!

"DCA, you're on the clock."

I received my Authorization to Test letter from Prometric yesterday. Only 3 years, 11 months, and 3 days until I'm 30.

i have 5 friends that are licensed and they aren't using it..... maybe to climb the ladder but they dont have any reason to practice...wtf....... i would like to have a license but since i skipped out on the "formal" IDP stuff, i would have to work in an office for 3 years and low pay to get that......


2:37am

Im testing right now. Prob could have earlier. Paperwork trouble with ncarb is 3 months turnaround everytime. So the back and forth can be 6 months right there. Since the boomer days when you could get lic. with 4 yr barch things have changed conciderably. I hear these older guys talk about school, wife & kids all at once and I just think if you did that now, on an entry architectural salary, you would be gurunteed to fail economically and be indebted for life. I've noticed those people tend to not do well in the peking order - ironically they can do much better in the trades.

I dont know what changed and when, but its changed. And it aint just architecture. Its everywhere.

I should note I know some who have done that route today but with very supportive extended family for help with the money - safety net.

I passed all my exams had obtained my license when I was 28. The current IDP and testing sequence is, by design ment to prolong the process of obtaining licensure.

When you think about it, it really benifits employers to have recent college grads, with either professional or masters degrees, tagged as "interns" for 3 years during while they fufill their IDP.

I did not even complete the IDP before I had passed all portions of the ARE and I took my exams through Texas becuase they would let me. Passed them all in 1 go and did it in just shy of 10 months. Now with my Texas license in hand, I'm on the waiting list for the California Supplimental Exam in Jan. 2007.

In all, I can't see any justification for not attempting to obtain a license as quickly as possible. Time=Money and the sooner your licensed and calling yourself an Architect, the better. I can't imagine anyone would argue that you would have fewer options in your professional career as a licensed individual vs. not having a license.

THe insurance and professional liability questions mentioned here I find really interesting. I've had no trouble obtaining liability insurance on a project specific basis for side work I've done. Granted, insurance rates are much higher when your newly licensed but I can't imagine any other professional dicipline where this would differ.

I got licensed at 29 and opened my own office at 30. I could get by on my own without it just doing residential, but I can't imagine having to take the tests at this point (a few years later). Its such a taxing thing and its best to get it over with asap; it only gets harder to find time the older you get...

Yay DCA!!!!!!!

it is such a pain to go through the process but the reward of being able to call yourself an architect are so worth it. Even if you work in a firm in which you will never, ever stamp a drawing, you have still achieved a huge accomplishment with getting it. I also agree to try to schedule the exams in fairly quick succession - I took one a month, which worked well for me, though one every couple weeks would work too, if you can really devote your weekends to studying.

Orhan is one of my heros for getting his license at age 50. Uber-cool.

Wow LB - one test a month? Was this painful? Did it put a lot of pressure on you? I have not gone through testing yet and I am trying to get a feel for timelines that work for me. If you could do it over, would you do the same? Or spread it out over a longer period of time? Guess it just depends on the person?

Orhan, congrats on your accomplishment; this makes me feel good about my life-long destitution of wanting to become an architect. I am in my late thirties and most think I am crazy for changing gears so late in life. Who cares about what others think, right?

thank you liberty bell.
i also got partly inspired with my early days of posting around here. it is one of the nicest gifts of this egocentric trade; the day you are licensed, the day you are an architect under law.
without trying, you do answer with a different gusto, when people ask you, what you do. and, your reply radiates a level of confidance that increases your chance of getting the project/position which makes the practice more and more interesting.

get your license if you still like architecture and earn a living from it, by the time you are 27-28 y.o., and earlier if available.but, ahem.., later is okay too. once you decide and you study, exams are easy to pass. in my case it was mostly fun to study and learn, and a sort of trivial if i may.
i recommend; archicards for tests and professor dorfs books for graphic parts.
california orals at the end are bitch but once you pass them, you can pass them forever, because they are really easy if you think about them, its just too pressurous when three retired architects are shooting at you with easy but three prong question requiring 12 short answers in a hotel room with tape recorder on etc.;)

Katze, late 30's are also great age to get licensed. your license becomes just a little more precious with some life experience wisdom and professional know how, as the years pass without it.

Orhan, thanks for the boost of confidence! Life experience, wisdom and professional know how is definitely one of the aspects that we have on our side…thanks.

I am hoping for 30. Or 31. Or 32. Damn.

Try starting school (B.Arch) at 35. Don't worry about your age, just do your thing and enjoy it. I guess nobody told you: 30 is the new 20.

I am currently 30 right now and will be taking the CA oral exam after the new years. Took me almost 2 years to complete all nine exams (fail 2 in the process). Although I encourage anyone who serious about being an architect to take the exams as early as possible, there something to be said about professional experience and life expereince.

Orhan, thanks for putting some perspective about the orals.

i don't think there are many drawbacks to being licensed. and there aren't many drawbacks to NOT being licensed either. architecture is a big field that encompasses a lot of different areas. you can be successfull wether you're licensed or not.

i plan to get licensed in my early 40's, in my late 30's right now and i'm too busy for testing. i make over 140k, in charge of many large international projects that an ncarb designation would mean little for if i had. so it's all about what works for YOUR situation. if i wanted to do smaller/ local projects, yes, licensing would be essential, but there is a place in architecture for everyone at every stage of their careers. don't stress about it. i know guys in their 60's who aren't licensed, and they know more about architecture then all the licensed guys at my firm put together.

don't though, think about architecture as just being about the license, since ncarb has only been around since the 1920's... and unless i'm wrong, most of the architecture created up till then was done by 'unlicensed' ~gasp~ architects.

i'm not against licensure though, i encourage all to be. or not. some egalitarian morons (other architects) use it as a measure to judge you by, and that makes them feel better about themselves.

i for one, tend to use talent as a judge for who's a good architect, registered or not, and talent, my friends, doesn't automatically come to you in a special package when you get your stamp.

You make 140K and your name is "punky"? Jeepers, where did I screw up? ;-)

This is not directed at you, punky, as you say you do plan to get licensed, but this is my response to what others might think about what you wrote: I don't judge anyone as less talented if they are not licensed - the exam has zero to do with design ability. But I do judge someone as less committed if they just don't bother getting the license because they don't have time/interest/see the benefits.

It would be like doing all but 3 credit hours of your university degree and then just never finishing it - if you don't have the degree, you didn't finish something major in your life, even if you do have all the knowledge.

Again, not saying anyone is less talented, less intelligent, less successful, or anything else. I just do see a license as a committed completion of a task. And it feels so damn good to get it I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to.

punky - you doubled your salary since last week. I quote: "i barely get by on 75k in LA." You must have had one hell of a promotion.

Ha ha ha zing!

nice l.b., don't most hunting accidents happen by someone who didn't direct the shot at them? :)

point taken, though the intent of my commments were to NOT be overly stressed about getting your license ASAP. i would worry more about learning as much as possible about practicing architecture, which has not much to do with the testing.
As i've only two tests left to take, i can atest to the fact that the tests have more to do with jumping through hoops than what is required to successfully practice architecture. and i can also atest to the fact that the tests would have been easier to get through had i done them when i was younger and didn't have a wife, and kids, and development projects on the side, and flights overseas, and......

oh, what zing gardike and buffalo fill, 75 is my firm wage, i make over 70 developing projects on my own. so. yeah. zing. got me.

So which of your three Master's degrees, Yale, Oxford or Harvard do you feel best prepared you for managing your earnings?

is that sour grapes you're eating buffalo, or are you really just that insecure about yourself? i apologize for being overeducated and undercertified.

Ha ha ha zing!

Who's gardike? I don't like him.