Regular posters on here know how I feel about IDP and the originally proffered model that one is to finish IDP, a variable time internship program, PRIOR to even beginning to take the ARE. If IDP has to stay, then it's comforting to see that some jurisdictions are allowing testing prior to its completion. I want to see intern-architects away from the breakfast tables and coffeehouses cuddling with ARE study materials as soon as possible, and enjoying life, especially after completing a degree in architecture.
One such state, and I had to look this up for someone, is New Mexico, which isn't my cup of tea. Look under the fifth section "Early Eligibility." It says:
One is now eligible to take the ARE after receiving a professional degree and obtaining an NCARB IDP number. It is no longer necessary to complete all, or any, of the IDP requirements .... (there's more, see link)
This is great. More states should adopt this policy, or only require a portion of all the IDP hours prior to testing. However, for some parts, testing after some practical experience is a little easier, since you've seen more practical applications. For the academic parts, what are you waiting for?
It's also great because, assuming a person goes into a B.Arch. at 18 and finishes at 23, they could have completed all their testing by 25 or 26, and keep on working toward knocking out IDP requirements. This could realistically mean that a driven architecture student and intern could be holding a license in their hands by age 30 in almost all cases.
Though not by much. In the good old days, and in some jurisdictions, the 23 y.o. B.Arch. holder could work 3 years, take a state's supplemental exam on the heels of it, and see their license by 27. With IDP taking 5 years, somewhat closer to 30 is more likely if one doesn't skip a beat. Every state seems to have a supplemental exam or interview, which can vary from fairly easy to rigorous.
I think the completion of IDP prior to examination needs to go away in ALL U.S. states and territories.
it's in ncarb's self interest to have people start taking the tests early (as long as IDP is required to get the actual license. no small detail). why? because once people start taking the test, they way more likely to finish idp (too much invested by then).
the reason it's not done "all over" is probably raw inertia - you'd have to change the actual law governing practice in the respective state and there may not be someone spearheading that effort (and to be fair, it's not going to be a top priority on your average state legislator's mind).
Jul 1, 13 7:10 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.
IDP, ARE, and "improvements"
Regular posters on here know how I feel about IDP and the originally proffered model that one is to finish IDP, a variable time internship program, PRIOR to even beginning to take the ARE. If IDP has to stay, then it's comforting to see that some jurisdictions are allowing testing prior to its completion. I want to see intern-architects away from the breakfast tables and coffeehouses cuddling with ARE study materials as soon as possible, and enjoying life, especially after completing a degree in architecture.
One such state, and I had to look this up for someone, is New Mexico, which isn't my cup of tea. Look under the fifth section "Early Eligibility." It says:
One is now eligible to take the ARE after receiving a professional degree and obtaining an NCARB IDP number. It is no longer necessary to complete all, or any, of the IDP requirements .... (there's more, see link)
http://www.nmbea.org/
This is great. More states should adopt this policy, or only require a portion of all the IDP hours prior to testing. However, for some parts, testing after some practical experience is a little easier, since you've seen more practical applications. For the academic parts, what are you waiting for?
It's also great because, assuming a person goes into a B.Arch. at 18 and finishes at 23, they could have completed all their testing by 25 or 26, and keep on working toward knocking out IDP requirements. This could realistically mean that a driven architecture student and intern could be holding a license in their hands by age 30 in almost all cases.
^
Though not by much. In the good old days, and in some jurisdictions, the 23 y.o. B.Arch. holder could work 3 years, take a state's supplemental exam on the heels of it, and see their license by 27. With IDP taking 5 years, somewhat closer to 30 is more likely if one doesn't skip a beat. Every state seems to have a supplemental exam or interview, which can vary from fairly easy to rigorous.
I think the completion of IDP prior to examination needs to go away in ALL U.S. states and territories.
it's in ncarb's self interest to have people start taking the tests early (as long as IDP is required to get the actual license. no small detail). why? because once people start taking the test, they way more likely to finish idp (too much invested by then).
the reason it's not done "all over" is probably raw inertia - you'd have to change the actual law governing practice in the respective state and there may not be someone spearheading that effort (and to be fair, it's not going to be a top priority on your average state legislator's mind).
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.