First, let me apologize if this has been a recent topic, but I couldn't find it anywhere.
I am beginning to take the ARE...there I said it... ok, breathe
I took the Pre-Design portion this past Saturday and used Kaplan's study book for this portion...
It didn't seem to have a large relativity to the test. To say it didn't help at all would be a lie, but I am wondering what people are using to pass this bohemeth of a test?
Please .... breathe.... please...
Well... areforum.org is a better spot for licensure related stuff, but....
Most people take pre-design AFTER Construction Documents, Materials and Methods, and ME Systems. The reason is that pre-design is almost (by design or not) a cumulation of those other 3 exams, and you will be inadvertently studying for pre-design by studying and taking the others. That might help you out if you didn't pass, but don't be surprised if you did - the passing threshold is around 75%, which means that if you know half the answers, and can narrow down the possible answers for each question you don't know to 2 of the 4, statistics say you are right there.
The flash cards work pretty well. You are echoing what I've heard from many friends about pre-design when they took it first. Everyone passed though. Don't get too worried yet.
this is not particularly germane to the specific topic but:
i took pre-design first, actually, and this is the method i used for all six written sections. i bought the archiflash flash cards and took all the pre-design cards out. i shuffled them up and started going through the cards. i'd pick a card, look at what was on the front. if i didn't know it in three seconds i put it to my right. if i knew exactly what it was i put the card to the left. then, i took all the cards on the right and tried to divide them into sub-sections (e.g., history, contracts, etc). then, i took each sub-section and used the cards to write an outline (in HS-english outline form) of the information. so, that means i'd looked at each card three times and i had to place it in some matrix of information. then, after i'd written the outline, i took all those cards on the right and started going through them again. ones i knew left, ones i didn't right. and i did this until, out of the number of cards in the section, i immediately knew 90% of them.
never failed a written section with this method (and pretty much this method alone).
does anyone have a complete recommended order for taking
the tests? personally i think i'm going to start out with materials
and methods..but what're the ones after that?
After I took the exam I told my friends I recommended taking the design/graphic sections first. I failed two of them due almost entirely to time managment. There is a LOT to cover in those few hours and if you haven't practiced a lot with the software and practice exams it's not especially easy. Problem was, I took them last, so after passing all the multiple choice tests first time through, I had to wait another 6 months to retake the graphic sections I failed.
My thought was, since the graphic portions are harder, go ahead and take them first, then you can always cram for the multiple choice exams and take them while waiting to retake the ones you might fail.
Just my experience.
Of the multiple choice exams, Pre-Design was by far the most comprehensive, IMO.
I finished all of mine and am waiting for results on the last two graphic divisions... My old office bought the ARE study guides and I used the Ballasts Study Guides. The Archiflash cards were good to use on the bus going to/from work.
Here's the order I took them in:
Materials & Methods
Construction Docs & Services
Pre-Design
General Structures
Lateral Forces
Mech. & Elec. Systems
Site Planning
Building Planning
Building Tech.
The multiple choice divisions were pretty easy, especially if you've had a somewhat 'well-rounded' work experience and remember anything from your pro-practice, structures, and building materials classes in undergrad.
The graphic divisions are by far the most difficult, but not because of the questions. The time constraints and awful excuse for a CAD program make them difficult.
The ARE forum is also a good resource for study tips...
A friend, after twice failing the building planning test (he knows exactly what he did wrong each time) recently went to this seminar by some guy who used to write and grade the tests and is now a lecturer helping people pass. He's apparently like part of the system by now because 90% of people who take his seminar pass the test, and supposedly if he stopped going around teaching people how to take it, tons more people would fail and they'd have to revise the test. So basically, word on the street is, cough up the $120 and go listen to this guy. (I'll get his name and put it here.)
Apparently there are all sorts of ridiculous rules you have to know in order to put the puzzle pieces of building planning together correctly for the test--things that are often counter-intuitive and are just basically assumptions the test-makers use to set up the test. If you know them, you're set, if you don't, chances are you'll make some dumb mistake and fail the whole thing. (Like, you need five feet of room on one side of a worktable, but not on the others, so you should shove all the worktables against the walls (bad design!!) and leave big aisles behind them... BUT, you DON'T need five feet clearance behind a filing cabinet, so go ahead and shove those in aisle-ways. Who knew?)
myriam -- no prob. i might as well be the friend you're talking about because i too failed building design twice.
his name is norman k. dorf, aia and man, he knows what he is talking about. because in the building design portion you have to unlearn how to design like an architect (that's why i failed building design twice). it's all learning how to take the test and manage your time.
i took his seminar and now have the license to prove that this guy is worth the $.
the more of us that get registered, the better! it's worth the time and expense.
Well, to counter slightly - I've never heard of Mr. Dorf and I figured out how to pass the building design portion on my own, after failing it. ochona is right on that you have to "stop designing like an architect" and start thinking like a "test-taker" if that makes sense.
What they want on the graphic exams is transparently clear if you have the study guides and - this is important: read the introductiry info they give you as you take the exam which lays out all their requirements! - but you have to absolutely jettison any notion of making it "cool" or even "good" or at all a space you would want to inhabit. Know the space planning rules and put stuff where it goes, that's all. It's not design, it's arrangement to fit the requested layout standards.
But if you have $120 to drop, by all means go talk to the expert. I'm sure it's worth it.
And god yes getting that license is soooo worth it.
Unless is is local and convenient, forget the Dorf seminar - just buy his "Solutions" book, which is good for all 3 graphics portions. You should probably get the graded exams too.
For the multiple choice exams I strongly suggest checking the list of references for each exam that is listed in the "ARE Guidelines" booklet that you get when you register to test (the booklet is green now, and switching to blue next month when the Site Planning test is revamped.)
Sometimes the 3rd party study materials (Kaplan/ALS, Ballast, ArchiFlash, etc.) are just not enough. And even if you do decide to stick to study guides, reading what the test covers and what books are suggested is a good starting point.
Kaplan in particular - which used to be ALS - is very slow in updating their materials. In fact, the current books are 95% identical to the ALS books from the mid-1990s. The test has changed a few times since then. Most notably, the multiple choice sections were substantially revamped in spring of 2004 and now include a lot more questions on sustainability, life cycle, energy conservation, new urbanism and other more recent urban planning models, and firm management. Though Kaplan bills their books as being revised for the latest version, they really have not changed much to address any of those subjects.
For the graphic exams: a lot of people swear by Prof. Dorf and his solutions book. For the most part people who use his materials and attend his seminars do very well. However, it seems that as time goes by and new versions of the test are released, Prof. Dorf is less able to get information and straight answers from NCARB regarding the new exams. There are a bunch of issues on which Prof. Dorf freely admits that he is guessing and/or it is his opinion as to what NCARB is really looking for/at on the exams.
On the areforum it seems there are people who have knowingly gone against his advice on some issues and passed - so, his insider info may be somewhat incomplete and/or outdated.
I completely agree that speed - and complete familiarity with the stupid software - is the single most important factor on most of the sections on the graphic exams.
Does anyone else here find it highly irregular that the ARE is a way for people like Mr. Ballast and Mr. Dorf (and others who help write and or administer the test ) to make a quick buck off interns?
What does it say about our profession and the worth of licensure when all one has to do to pass the tests is cough up $120 here and $54 there and $700 to NCARB and $1000 to thompson plyometrics...
Those test are not about what one knows but rather a measure of if one bought the right study guides to be able to decipher test strategies and to midlessly force feed silly facts for a week or two so as to be able to regurgitate at the test center during a test.
The more i hear and experience the racket these people have going, the more respect i loose for licensed architects.
I think that "all one has to do to pass the tests is cough up $120 here and $54 there and $700 to NCARB and $1000 to thompson plyometrics.." is a pretty wild exaggeration. Tell that to someone who is taking the tests. Were that actually the case, you would expect that individuals with a minimum of 8 years combined architectural training and professional experience to to be able to muster a passing rate of more than the 70% that it was last year..
my other method for passing the ARE was scotch eggs. i decided to take most of my exams in san antonio because the center there was open on saturdays -- that way i could avoid tipping off my paranoid (now ex-)boss that i was getting my license. my wife would make me three scotch eggs to take with me. one i would eat in the car during the hour-long drive from austin. the second i would eat during my break. the third i would eat afterwards.
100% (yes, folks, 100%) pass rate when scotch eggs were eaten. and the cost of the ingredients to make scotch eggs, total, was probably like $2. and my wife said she was donating her time pro bono in exchange for a eames rocker when i got my license.
Clearly i was slightly exaggerating for effect, however my comment is not too far from the truth. There is ample reason to suspect collusion among NCARB, IDP, ARE, Thompson Plyometrics and the standard "study guides."
I see many more cases of interns having to cough up yet aother fee the way of the testing monopoly than cases of IDP/ ARE teaching young interns to be talented analytical thinkers.
Do you not question on some level the validity of a test where people study using flascards? I last did flashcards back in the elementary school days when i was preparing for spelling bees.
Do you not question the validity of a test where passing the graphics divisios is to a large part based on being familiar with a 1980's era drafting program of a joke?
What does a 70% pasing rate after 8 years of interning say about the quality and effectivemess of the IDP program and the teaching ability of the professsion's mentors?
Suture, I agree with you to some degree - the exams cost too much, and there is no question that Prometric, and NCARB are at least acting to one another's benefit because they each profit from the arrangement. But I don't think it is collusion or conspiracy. The greater likelihood is that both organizations are full of cabbageheaded bureaucrats that look at the present as a model for the future, and are doing their jobs so well that they aren't thinking about how to improve them.
The graphics exams are pretty dumb, and the cad program sucks, but they also couldn't use a proprietary program, and it couldn't be so complicated that learning it would be more of a burden than knowing the material. The graphics exams are simple, straightforward technical exercises. If you can't do them, you don't deserve to be an architect. Easy enough, if they were graded predictably. Quirks in the cad software appear to cause people to fail because of duplicated lines or funny overlaps when their solutions should be otherwise be satisfactory. Pretty poor.
And the flashcards - no one is going to pass merely by studying the flashcards. The material they cover is so sparse compared to what is on the exam it would be impossible. They work because you can use the flashcards, discover an entire chapter, or book that you forgot to study (or didn't know anything about to begin with), and then go back and study the material.
And I think 70% is not bad given that there is no incentive in the profession to mentor interns. The medical Board passing rates are higher than that.
a scotch egg is a hard-boiled egg, wrapped in sausage, wrapped again in bread crumbs, either fried or baked (my wife bakes 'em). traditional scottish/scots dish, usually a breakfast food
Note: while the pass rate per individual test is generally between 67% and 80% (varies slightly from year to year) the OVERALL rate of passing all 9 tests on the first try is considerably lower - my state board guy told me it is less than 50% in this state.
Also, a huge number of people never get to the end of the 9 tests. NCARB wrote in one of their newsletters that they administer 35,000 divisions per year, but of those only about 2000 are someone's final test (meaning lots of people failing divisions, and lots of people dropping out and never getting to the end.)
But: in the paper-pencil test days, largely prior to the IDP requirement, the pass rate was in the 30% to 40% range (as reported by Prof. Dorf, who used to work for NCARB.) So, there may in fact be some quantifiable benefit to IDP.
In my point of view the exams are a right of passage, you must demonstrate a minimum level of competence to practice. That said, the methods of testing for this knowledge does not represent ounces particular talents and commitment to the profession. I personally have passes three exam, for each I have studied very hard and done all the mentioned reading plus hours of studying and learning things, that I should have learned in undergrad and grad school, but I was to busy with my studio work, subjects like M&M and M&E were crammed in the night before the test, never really learning anything, just memorizing. Thankfully I have passed the three exams, but the remaining nine linger over me like a dark cloud affecting my every day performance. I feel very ignorant after leaving the testing center, somewhat like a prisoner of the system asking for parole, waiting for the letters that say FAIL in which case a new “parole hearing†will be scheduled in six months or PASS, with the bitter sweet knowledge that shortly I will have to relive the experience once again, and again, until that day when the letters will stop coming and my life can go on as a free architect. My greatest compliment to those of you who have endured and succeeded in this right of passage, I hope to be welcomed into the nest in the not to far future.
You have to question an organization that would cease to exist without collection of fees - moreover, repeat (retake fees). The ARE exams are irrelevant means towards licensure - they are a joke-prometric is a bigger joke. They don't qualify anyone as an architect, and I've seen some really talented people lose alot of professional opportunity while waiting six-months to retake the stupid exams. Alot of the pass/fail rate has things built into it, like demographics, etc, I'm sure. Ever see an NCARB newletter? The whole organization is basically a fraternity.
I respect anyone who has edured the exam process, but respect them as an architect? Not really.
y'all should just wait for the california oral exam - if you thought pre-design was random... these three guys in a hotel room will make your head spin.
egghead 1: what, from the sample document, would you recommend from the coastal commision regarding the storefront.
egghead 2: where in the CBC (that's the Calif. Building Code, 'cause they just have to be special - it's mostly the UBC with addenda) does it specify foundations in San Fernando.
I truly appreciate the many honest suggestions and helpful strategies. I too hope to get my licensure by the end of this year if all goes according to plan. My boss/owner also agrees with a few of you about the AIA and how absurd they are, this is why he quit their organization and stayed with NCARB. From what I hear not much better but at least the initials are after the name.
My opinion for what it's worth is that the ARE should cost more. Wait, I know what you're thinking "that I'm an idiot", but if it really is the hardest test in the nation and it is created by the same people who help create the BAR for scum/ I mean lawyers, then shouldn't it be a little more prestigious.
Yes, the word "ARCHITECT" already has a pride factor built in and sometimes I wonder about the people who have already made it just for the title.
For what it's worth, you don't need to be a pay dues to put letters after your name. A simple "R.A." will do. So far I've passed 5 out of 9. My last one scheduled on April 1. Absolutely brutal so far. Do doctors even have to take a test? If so, it better be worse than ours. I know the bar is not.
MDs do have to take several exams, in the last year of med school there is one (to be able to be called M.D) after the first year of residency #2 (which certify then of completing an internship), during residency (3 for internal medicine to 8 for neurosurgery) take one every year as preparation for their final Board Certification, After finishing residency MDs take a specialty examination to be board certify in an specialty.
not or Md are boar certify.
In comparison to the ARE there are fewer exam, more concentrated focus and plenty of practice, you have to realize MD are trained by repetition.
If this process was generally applied to the training of an architect, it would go something like taking one comprehensive exam during the last year of Grad school, say history, structures, theory, material and methods and other general topics, we pass and get to be call intern architects, we do one year of actual practice in a teaching firm, we take one exam covering CD and professional practice issues, and get licensed, then you would chose an specialty, such as high rise structure or multi- family per say and go on and spend 3-8 years working with a firm that does nothing but your specialty, then at the end of that training you take a final written exam plus an oral exam on your specialty only, meanwhile you are getting job offers somewhere in the 200k to 350k per year..
I just retuned from another parole hearing this time involving the inappropriate used of materials and erroneous methods of construction. I can’t imagine the people that make up these questions or the discussions that take place in some lockdown smoky rooms where questions are created to miss lead, used archaic and discontinued methodology and some cruel humorous expression of the state of our chosen profession. I can’t tell you how disappointed I am with this process, without going into forbidden details, the questions were unintelligent, superficial and irrelevant to the subject at hand, which to me is one of the most fascinating and evolving aspects of architecture, when was the last time you saw a balloon frame go up?
Feb 7, 06 11:08 am ·
·
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.
ARE Test Exam Woes
First, let me apologize if this has been a recent topic, but I couldn't find it anywhere.
I am beginning to take the ARE...there I said it... ok, breathe
I took the Pre-Design portion this past Saturday and used Kaplan's study book for this portion...
It didn't seem to have a large relativity to the test. To say it didn't help at all would be a lie, but I am wondering what people are using to pass this bohemeth of a test?
Please .... breathe.... please...
Well... areforum.org is a better spot for licensure related stuff, but....
Most people take pre-design AFTER Construction Documents, Materials and Methods, and ME Systems. The reason is that pre-design is almost (by design or not) a cumulation of those other 3 exams, and you will be inadvertently studying for pre-design by studying and taking the others. That might help you out if you didn't pass, but don't be surprised if you did - the passing threshold is around 75%, which means that if you know half the answers, and can narrow down the possible answers for each question you don't know to 2 of the 4, statistics say you are right there.
Thanks for the info. I also appreciate the other site Janosh.
thanks for the help j.
The flash cards work pretty well. You are echoing what I've heard from many friends about pre-design when they took it first. Everyone passed though. Don't get too worried yet.
this is not particularly germane to the specific topic but:
i took pre-design first, actually, and this is the method i used for all six written sections. i bought the archiflash flash cards and took all the pre-design cards out. i shuffled them up and started going through the cards. i'd pick a card, look at what was on the front. if i didn't know it in three seconds i put it to my right. if i knew exactly what it was i put the card to the left. then, i took all the cards on the right and tried to divide them into sub-sections (e.g., history, contracts, etc). then, i took each sub-section and used the cards to write an outline (in HS-english outline form) of the information. so, that means i'd looked at each card three times and i had to place it in some matrix of information. then, after i'd written the outline, i took all those cards on the right and started going through them again. ones i knew left, ones i didn't right. and i did this until, out of the number of cards in the section, i immediately knew 90% of them.
never failed a written section with this method (and pretty much this method alone).
does anyone have a complete recommended order for taking
the tests? personally i think i'm going to start out with materials
and methods..but what're the ones after that?
After I took the exam I told my friends I recommended taking the design/graphic sections first. I failed two of them due almost entirely to time managment. There is a LOT to cover in those few hours and if you haven't practiced a lot with the software and practice exams it's not especially easy. Problem was, I took them last, so after passing all the multiple choice tests first time through, I had to wait another 6 months to retake the graphic sections I failed.
My thought was, since the graphic portions are harder, go ahead and take them first, then you can always cram for the multiple choice exams and take them while waiting to retake the ones you might fail.
Just my experience.
Of the multiple choice exams, Pre-Design was by far the most comprehensive, IMO.
I finished all of mine and am waiting for results on the last two graphic divisions... My old office bought the ARE study guides and I used the Ballasts Study Guides. The Archiflash cards were good to use on the bus going to/from work.
Here's the order I took them in:
Materials & Methods
Construction Docs & Services
Pre-Design
General Structures
Lateral Forces
Mech. & Elec. Systems
Site Planning
Building Planning
Building Tech.
The multiple choice divisions were pretty easy, especially if you've had a somewhat 'well-rounded' work experience and remember anything from your pro-practice, structures, and building materials classes in undergrad.
The graphic divisions are by far the most difficult, but not because of the questions. The time constraints and awful excuse for a CAD program make them difficult.
The ARE forum is also a good resource for study tips...
ochona, that is awesome advice. That sounds like EXACTLY the method I'd learn from best. Thank you!!
A friend, after twice failing the building planning test (he knows exactly what he did wrong each time) recently went to this seminar by some guy who used to write and grade the tests and is now a lecturer helping people pass. He's apparently like part of the system by now because 90% of people who take his seminar pass the test, and supposedly if he stopped going around teaching people how to take it, tons more people would fail and they'd have to revise the test. So basically, word on the street is, cough up the $120 and go listen to this guy. (I'll get his name and put it here.)
Apparently there are all sorts of ridiculous rules you have to know in order to put the puzzle pieces of building planning together correctly for the test--things that are often counter-intuitive and are just basically assumptions the test-makers use to set up the test. If you know them, you're set, if you don't, chances are you'll make some dumb mistake and fail the whole thing. (Like, you need five feet of room on one side of a worktable, but not on the others, so you should shove all the worktables against the walls (bad design!!) and leave big aisles behind them... BUT, you DON'T need five feet clearance behind a filing cabinet, so go ahead and shove those in aisle-ways. Who knew?)
myriam -- no prob. i might as well be the friend you're talking about because i too failed building design twice.
his name is norman k. dorf, aia and man, he knows what he is talking about. because in the building design portion you have to unlearn how to design like an architect (that's why i failed building design twice). it's all learning how to take the test and manage your time.
i took his seminar and now have the license to prove that this guy is worth the $.
the more of us that get registered, the better! it's worth the time and expense.
Well, to counter slightly - I've never heard of Mr. Dorf and I figured out how to pass the building design portion on my own, after failing it. ochona is right on that you have to "stop designing like an architect" and start thinking like a "test-taker" if that makes sense.
What they want on the graphic exams is transparently clear if you have the study guides and - this is important: read the introductiry info they give you as you take the exam which lays out all their requirements! - but you have to absolutely jettison any notion of making it "cool" or even "good" or at all a space you would want to inhabit. Know the space planning rules and put stuff where it goes, that's all. It's not design, it's arrangement to fit the requested layout standards.
But if you have $120 to drop, by all means go talk to the expert. I'm sure it's worth it.
And god yes getting that license is soooo worth it.
Unless is is local and convenient, forget the Dorf seminar - just buy his "Solutions" book, which is good for all 3 graphics portions. You should probably get the graded exams too.
http://www.are-solutions.com/
$54 and worth much more than that.
He gives you a methodology for each vignette that should speed you up significantly, and outlines possible pitfalls and hiccups that'll fail you.
This is an unsolicited testimonial. Dorf is one of the few really great things about the ARE process.
For the multiple choice exams I strongly suggest checking the list of references for each exam that is listed in the "ARE Guidelines" booklet that you get when you register to test (the booklet is green now, and switching to blue next month when the Site Planning test is revamped.)
Sometimes the 3rd party study materials (Kaplan/ALS, Ballast, ArchiFlash, etc.) are just not enough. And even if you do decide to stick to study guides, reading what the test covers and what books are suggested is a good starting point.
Kaplan in particular - which used to be ALS - is very slow in updating their materials. In fact, the current books are 95% identical to the ALS books from the mid-1990s. The test has changed a few times since then. Most notably, the multiple choice sections were substantially revamped in spring of 2004 and now include a lot more questions on sustainability, life cycle, energy conservation, new urbanism and other more recent urban planning models, and firm management. Though Kaplan bills their books as being revised for the latest version, they really have not changed much to address any of those subjects.
For the graphic exams: a lot of people swear by Prof. Dorf and his solutions book. For the most part people who use his materials and attend his seminars do very well. However, it seems that as time goes by and new versions of the test are released, Prof. Dorf is less able to get information and straight answers from NCARB regarding the new exams. There are a bunch of issues on which Prof. Dorf freely admits that he is guessing and/or it is his opinion as to what NCARB is really looking for/at on the exams.
On the areforum it seems there are people who have knowingly gone against his advice on some issues and passed - so, his insider info may be somewhat incomplete and/or outdated.
I completely agree that speed - and complete familiarity with the stupid software - is the single most important factor on most of the sections on the graphic exams.
areforum.org is an awesome resource too
Ochona-
You're study method is going make my head explode.
Does anyone else here find it highly irregular that the ARE is a way for people like Mr. Ballast and Mr. Dorf (and others who help write and or administer the test ) to make a quick buck off interns?
What does it say about our profession and the worth of licensure when all one has to do to pass the tests is cough up $120 here and $54 there and $700 to NCARB and $1000 to thompson plyometrics...
Those test are not about what one knows but rather a measure of if one bought the right study guides to be able to decipher test strategies and to midlessly force feed silly facts for a week or two so as to be able to regurgitate at the test center during a test.
The more i hear and experience the racket these people have going, the more respect i loose for licensed architects.
What a cruel joke IDP, ARE and the AIA are.
I think that "all one has to do to pass the tests is cough up $120 here and $54 there and $700 to NCARB and $1000 to thompson plyometrics.." is a pretty wild exaggeration. Tell that to someone who is taking the tests. Were that actually the case, you would expect that individuals with a minimum of 8 years combined architectural training and professional experience to to be able to muster a passing rate of more than the 70% that it was last year..
But I agree with you on the AIA.
my other method for passing the ARE was scotch eggs. i decided to take most of my exams in san antonio because the center there was open on saturdays -- that way i could avoid tipping off my paranoid (now ex-)boss that i was getting my license. my wife would make me three scotch eggs to take with me. one i would eat in the car during the hour-long drive from austin. the second i would eat during my break. the third i would eat afterwards.
100% (yes, folks, 100%) pass rate when scotch eggs were eaten. and the cost of the ingredients to make scotch eggs, total, was probably like $2. and my wife said she was donating her time pro bono in exchange for a eames rocker when i got my license.
Janosh,
Clearly i was slightly exaggerating for effect, however my comment is not too far from the truth. There is ample reason to suspect collusion among NCARB, IDP, ARE, Thompson Plyometrics and the standard "study guides."
I see many more cases of interns having to cough up yet aother fee the way of the testing monopoly than cases of IDP/ ARE teaching young interns to be talented analytical thinkers.
Do you not question on some level the validity of a test where people study using flascards? I last did flashcards back in the elementary school days when i was preparing for spelling bees.
Do you not question the validity of a test where passing the graphics divisios is to a large part based on being familiar with a 1980's era drafting program of a joke?
What does a 70% pasing rate after 8 years of interning say about the quality and effectivemess of the IDP program and the teaching ability of the professsion's mentors?
what is a scotch egg?
will that be on the test?
I also wonder what the hell a scotch egg is.
Suture, I agree with you to some degree - the exams cost too much, and there is no question that Prometric, and NCARB are at least acting to one another's benefit because they each profit from the arrangement. But I don't think it is collusion or conspiracy. The greater likelihood is that both organizations are full of cabbageheaded bureaucrats that look at the present as a model for the future, and are doing their jobs so well that they aren't thinking about how to improve them.
The graphics exams are pretty dumb, and the cad program sucks, but they also couldn't use a proprietary program, and it couldn't be so complicated that learning it would be more of a burden than knowing the material. The graphics exams are simple, straightforward technical exercises. If you can't do them, you don't deserve to be an architect. Easy enough, if they were graded predictably. Quirks in the cad software appear to cause people to fail because of duplicated lines or funny overlaps when their solutions should be otherwise be satisfactory. Pretty poor.
And the flashcards - no one is going to pass merely by studying the flashcards. The material they cover is so sparse compared to what is on the exam it would be impossible. They work because you can use the flashcards, discover an entire chapter, or book that you forgot to study (or didn't know anything about to begin with), and then go back and study the material.
And I think 70% is not bad given that there is no incentive in the profession to mentor interns. The medical Board passing rates are higher than that.
a scotch egg is a hard-boiled egg, wrapped in sausage, wrapped again in bread crumbs, either fried or baked (my wife bakes 'em). traditional scottish/scots dish, usually a breakfast food
word of warning: 300 - 450 calories per egg
ochona you still working tonight?
just about to get home for that quality 4.5 hrs of sleep before i gotta be an architect all again tomorrow
you?
and i thought arrancini were the worlds greatest food killer.
Note: while the pass rate per individual test is generally between 67% and 80% (varies slightly from year to year) the OVERALL rate of passing all 9 tests on the first try is considerably lower - my state board guy told me it is less than 50% in this state.
Also, a huge number of people never get to the end of the 9 tests. NCARB wrote in one of their newsletters that they administer 35,000 divisions per year, but of those only about 2000 are someone's final test (meaning lots of people failing divisions, and lots of people dropping out and never getting to the end.)
But: in the paper-pencil test days, largely prior to the IDP requirement, the pass rate was in the 30% to 40% range (as reported by Prof. Dorf, who used to work for NCARB.) So, there may in fact be some quantifiable benefit to IDP.
In my point of view the exams are a right of passage, you must demonstrate a minimum level of competence to practice. That said, the methods of testing for this knowledge does not represent ounces particular talents and commitment to the profession. I personally have passes three exam, for each I have studied very hard and done all the mentioned reading plus hours of studying and learning things, that I should have learned in undergrad and grad school, but I was to busy with my studio work, subjects like M&M and M&E were crammed in the night before the test, never really learning anything, just memorizing. Thankfully I have passed the three exams, but the remaining nine linger over me like a dark cloud affecting my every day performance. I feel very ignorant after leaving the testing center, somewhat like a prisoner of the system asking for parole, waiting for the letters that say FAIL in which case a new “parole hearing†will be scheduled in six months or PASS, with the bitter sweet knowledge that shortly I will have to relive the experience once again, and again, until that day when the letters will stop coming and my life can go on as a free architect. My greatest compliment to those of you who have endured and succeeded in this right of passage, I hope to be welcomed into the nest in the not to far future.
You have to question an organization that would cease to exist without collection of fees - moreover, repeat (retake fees). The ARE exams are irrelevant means towards licensure - they are a joke-prometric is a bigger joke. They don't qualify anyone as an architect, and I've seen some really talented people lose alot of professional opportunity while waiting six-months to retake the stupid exams. Alot of the pass/fail rate has things built into it, like demographics, etc, I'm sure. Ever see an NCARB newletter? The whole organization is basically a fraternity.
I respect anyone who has edured the exam process, but respect them as an architect? Not really.
Funny, pimp---I was just looking at the NCARB newsletter and thinking the same thing....not the most diverse group of people.
southpole---you have to take 12 exams? I thought it was 9?
Sorry, I jones , it just feel that after three I have made very little head way, but you are right only nine, i have 6 left, 5 after monday!
y'all should just wait for the california oral exam - if you thought pre-design was random... these three guys in a hotel room will make your head spin.
egghead 1: what, from the sample document, would you recommend from the coastal commision regarding the storefront.
egghead 2: where in the CBC (that's the Calif. Building Code, 'cause they just have to be special - it's mostly the UBC with addenda) does it specify foundations in San Fernando.
scotchegg: do these questions make me look fat.
I truly appreciate the many honest suggestions and helpful strategies. I too hope to get my licensure by the end of this year if all goes according to plan. My boss/owner also agrees with a few of you about the AIA and how absurd they are, this is why he quit their organization and stayed with NCARB. From what I hear not much better but at least the initials are after the name.
My opinion for what it's worth is that the ARE should cost more. Wait, I know what you're thinking "that I'm an idiot", but if it really is the hardest test in the nation and it is created by the same people who help create the BAR for scum/ I mean lawyers, then shouldn't it be a little more prestigious.
Yes, the word "ARCHITECT" already has a pride factor built in and sometimes I wonder about the people who have already made it just for the title.
For what it's worth, you don't need to be a pay dues to put letters after your name. A simple "R.A." will do. So far I've passed 5 out of 9. My last one scheduled on April 1. Absolutely brutal so far. Do doctors even have to take a test? If so, it better be worse than ours. I know the bar is not.
MDs do have to take several exams, in the last year of med school there is one (to be able to be called M.D) after the first year of residency #2 (which certify then of completing an internship), during residency (3 for internal medicine to 8 for neurosurgery) take one every year as preparation for their final Board Certification, After finishing residency MDs take a specialty examination to be board certify in an specialty.
not or Md are boar certify.
In comparison to the ARE there are fewer exam, more concentrated focus and plenty of practice, you have to realize MD are trained by repetition.
If this process was generally applied to the training of an architect, it would go something like taking one comprehensive exam during the last year of Grad school, say history, structures, theory, material and methods and other general topics, we pass and get to be call intern architects, we do one year of actual practice in a teaching firm, we take one exam covering CD and professional practice issues, and get licensed, then you would chose an specialty, such as high rise structure or multi- family per say and go on and spend 3-8 years working with a firm that does nothing but your specialty, then at the end of that training you take a final written exam plus an oral exam on your specialty only, meanwhile you are getting job offers somewhere in the 200k to 350k per year..
I just retuned from another parole hearing this time involving the inappropriate used of materials and erroneous methods of construction. I can’t imagine the people that make up these questions or the discussions that take place in some lockdown smoky rooms where questions are created to miss lead, used archaic and discontinued methodology and some cruel humorous expression of the state of our chosen profession. I can’t tell you how disappointed I am with this process, without going into forbidden details, the questions were unintelligent, superficial and irrelevant to the subject at hand, which to me is one of the most fascinating and evolving aspects of architecture, when was the last time you saw a balloon frame go up?
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.