Sometimes I like to browse the job posting ads on craigslist to see what's out there and I click on one that's titled "Intern Architect." In the body of the ad is says "opening for...individual with 2-5 years experience..."
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't get it. I was under the impression that Intern Architect meant someone with 0-3 years of experience. If that's true, how can they expect to hire an "Intern architect" with 2-5 years of experience.
Some offices use the term 'intern' to describe any unlicensed designer, regardless of skill level or experience. I might be wrong, but I think a strict reading of NCARB's nomenclature guidelines implies that this is how the term should be used. See, for example, the note at the bottom of this page:
(personally, I think it's counterproductive, not to mention insulting, to call any unlicensed architect with a professional degree and (let's say) more than one year of office experience an intern, but hey, what're you gonna do?)
Don't be offended, afrdzak, or anyone unlicensed. The use of "intern" by a firm also implies that they understand that you don't have enough knowledge or experience to be termed a Project Architect, thus they know they will be at least somewhat responsible for training you. This is reality, not condescension (sp?).
If one does have greater than, say, 10 years of experience and is not yet licensed, then that person probably has their own reasons for making that decision and are thus far beyond being concerned about vocabulary.
I actually am offended when the word is used in this way. I've got a Master's and over 3 years experience. Haven't even gotten around to opening a file with NCARB yet, though, but I'm sure I'd have most of the credits already.
An intern (to my mind, and in the minds of many people within and without the profession) is someone who's still in school, isn't paid that much, and performs tasks that don't require a lot of decision making ability. I'm not an intern.
Another ambiguity that confuses me: "A licensed architect with 10 years experience."
Does that mean a person who has been a licensed architect for 10 years, or someone who has been in the industry for 10 years, regardless of when they got registered?
I think this is part of a larger issue, the terminology is f*cked in general. I just created another thread about the legal use, misuse, and abuse of the larger term.
I love it when they post an ad looking for a licensed architect, capable of running multiple projects and leading a team. Then at the bottom they post 2-5 years of experience. In other words they want somebody that can do everything but want to pay them an interns salary.
Dec 30, 07 8:55 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.
Someone explain this to me
Sometimes I like to browse the job posting ads on craigslist to see what's out there and I click on one that's titled "Intern Architect." In the body of the ad is says "opening for...individual with 2-5 years experience..."
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't get it. I was under the impression that Intern Architect meant someone with 0-3 years of experience. If that's true, how can they expect to hire an "Intern architect" with 2-5 years of experience.
Some offices use the term 'intern' to describe any unlicensed designer, regardless of skill level or experience. I might be wrong, but I think a strict reading of NCARB's nomenclature guidelines implies that this is how the term should be used. See, for example, the note at the bottom of this page:
link
(personally, I think it's counterproductive, not to mention insulting, to call any unlicensed architect with a professional degree and (let's say) more than one year of office experience an intern, but hey, what're you gonna do?)
hmm, interesting. Says a lot about the mentality of the firm, at least, the person who posted the ad.
Thanks.
i would like to see an advert that doesn't hold back:
wanted: b*tch
Don't be offended, afrdzak, or anyone unlicensed. The use of "intern" by a firm also implies that they understand that you don't have enough knowledge or experience to be termed a Project Architect, thus they know they will be at least somewhat responsible for training you. This is reality, not condescension (sp?).
If one does have greater than, say, 10 years of experience and is not yet licensed, then that person probably has their own reasons for making that decision and are thus far beyond being concerned about vocabulary.
I'm not offended. Just curious. I haven't gotten my degree yet, so I can't be offended (yet) ;-).
I actually am offended when the word is used in this way. I've got a Master's and over 3 years experience. Haven't even gotten around to opening a file with NCARB yet, though, but I'm sure I'd have most of the credits already.
An intern (to my mind, and in the minds of many people within and without the profession) is someone who's still in school, isn't paid that much, and performs tasks that don't require a lot of decision making ability. I'm not an intern.
Another ambiguity that confuses me: "A licensed architect with 10 years experience."
Does that mean a person who has been a licensed architect for 10 years, or someone who has been in the industry for 10 years, regardless of when they got registered?
I think this is part of a larger issue, the terminology is f*cked in general. I just created another thread about the legal use, misuse, and abuse of the larger term.
I love it when they post an ad looking for a licensed architect, capable of running multiple projects and leading a team. Then at the bottom they post 2-5 years of experience. In other words they want somebody that can do everything but want to pay them an interns salary.
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.