There are other posts that address this [url=http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=43919_100_42_0
]link[/url] It's really a circular question...

Good lord...I got trapped in that war zone for about 2 hours! Thanks for the post Alexi...

However this seems to be addressing the Interior Designer vs Architect Debate. How I see it: Design is design. Period. We all (architects, interior designers, interior architects, industrial designers, graphic designers) use the same principals and theories to design something functional and aesthetically pleasing. We are problem solvers....

"When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty.
I only think how to solve the problem. But when I am finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong." -Buckminster Fuller

Does this not apply to us all? What ever happen to interdisplinary collaborative thinking? If they are a strong designer who cares what their discipline or "label" is. Honestly.

However! when it comes time to put something on my resume, I unfortunately need a label......So, Is there a textbook difference between an Interior Designer and and Interior Architect? Some schools consider this the same proffession. I am looking for some answers....

Thanks!

ok - confession now - i run a course in 'interior architecture' in addition to two others -- interior architecture is NOT interior design nor architecture - it is very different than architecture and is spatial - if one understand where practice is going and how one wishes to engage in these different practices - one would be an interior architect

the space of a room, virtual, urban, artifact, cinematic, performance, live projects, community......

its not about building but all about building....

the space of text

Um...what?

Good lord, I'm lost on TED's response.

Treat me like I am eight: Very simple words and sentences that are not to long.

What is the difference between interior design and interior architecture?

I am with you dsc_arch....1. since when are architecture and interior design not spatial? 2. wtf..are you talking about.

I say they are the same profession. My BFA is in "Interior Architecture & Design".

I DO, however, believe that there is a distinction between an "Interior Designer" and an "Interior Decorator".

It depends on how much cocaine is involved.

Dallas, are you licensed as an architect or a designer? and what school did you graduate from?

what you get as a degree is irrelevant to the term - I will say bartlett is a school of interior architecture - that is break the boundaries of the discipline of prescribed architecture - much about the space of the room and that is not in the literal sense

it could be the space of a book or both together.

this is an area that doesn't fit smug within the drafting room of large corp practices - you may never be an architect when you leave this place but critical about the way you see the room, complex in the say you see it. think of how many disappointed archinecters are here on this web site - feeling that the 'profession has let them down' ......'where is AIA when you need them?'.... 'I went to the GSD and now I am a CAD monkey!'

architecture isn't a single profession [please dont tell AIA/RIBA!]

tell me, those who go to sciarc with some 70%ish going into the film/cinema industry - do they design buildings?

it is very easy to define what an architect is or does [NCARB / ARB has that gig all buttoned up]

but really most of you desire something more out of the craft that you practice - the non-conventional - working for Habitat for humanity - digital worlds -

interior architecture / architects explore a vast and interesting realm of spatial boundaries with the specific intent on not being builders of objects [in today's world...not being developer bitches!]

Please use simpler language. after a hard day of real work designing buildings and being responsible for them the analysis and theory of space seems like theory bs to me.

BTW i was a thesis advisor to a Columbia College (Chicago) student in their interior architecture department and and no possibility of getting an architecture license. the bent was about the volumetrics (feeling of enclosure / space).

In my experiance there was no hvac, structures, practice, landscape, site integration, discussed. all in all it was interior design.

see http://www.colum.edu/Academics/Art_and_Design/Programs/Interior%20BFA/index.php

So Ted, what do you mean by this?

Since i am an active proponent of architect lead design build, it is my belief that the architect is the conductor of the orchestra and all of the specialists are playing an instrument to a score, and not a base in jazz jam session.

if it is intangible experiences that you are developing, I'd call you a "virtual architect."

My friends and I used to make no distinction between the two. Interior architect vs. interior designer still equaled "carpet picker".

Lol.

I jest, in part. I worked for a few years, during the dot com boom, at an interiors firm doing marketing.

In my personal experience I found that the interiors people couldn't draw/draft very effectively or make a detail that would hold up for more than a few years (forget getting anywhere near water!) The contractor "solved" all the "hard" problems, in the generally messy way that most union contractors do.

The interiors people worked hard, don't get me wrong on that, and their work usually came out with a certain sort of polish and finesse. Plus they made a boatload of cash at the time.

But all in all, it was what it was, a decorated floor plate inside some other architects generic urban high rise - a space meant to be demoed and redone in a few years.

A sense of permanence was definitely lacking.


Oh wait this wasn't an architect vs. interiors thread. Fvck me.

Simple answer- There should be no difference.

Good Interior Designers understand, and can in fact enhance, the 4 dimensions of architectural context within the basic requirements of structure, regulations, M/E/P systems and the needs of the end user.

Unfortunately ID is still struggling mightily with an identity crisis that includes split personality disorder and gender identification issues. Many interior designers are merely 2 dimensional with no clue how to shape form, balance scale, interface with building systems and simplify circulation as well as all of the miscellaneous aesthetic niceties in order to achieve gestalt within an architectural envelope. They just don't get it.

In the mid-70's the AIA formed an IA specialty group due to the poor performance of interior designers at the time. ID education had really just begun and was largely influenced by decorators. The AIA also so an opportunity given the burgeoning commercial market. Jump forward 35 years- the ID profession has made great strides in its expertise and general body of knowledge. Many of us in the "profession" realize that we have to work collaboratively with architects and allied design professionals. I think the NCIDQ is improving to reflect this paradigm shift. However the stigma of decorators and the stereotype of the diva (both genders) with a flair for color still haunts us.

I know that many IA degree programs are accredited by CIDA and none are accredited by NAAB. I know that you cannot legally call yourself an interior architect with being an RA. I know that some IA degree programs maintain the IA moniker simply to avoid the stereotypes of Interior Design. I cannot blame them.

Just know that there are thousands of Interior Designers out there that are working daily (and nightly ;-) to help make architecture better. Unfortunately HGTV is not interested in this aspect of the profession. Improving the human condition in a professional manner that respects the intent of the architect and the programmatic needs of the end user within the confines of our natural world does not make for good T.V.

sai:

Your basic premise that "design is design" is absolutely correct. There are good and bad designers in ALL professions related to that word, from urban planner to architect to clothing designer to food stylist - all are design.

When it comes to your resume, however, be very careful about the use of the word architect. The word "architect" - as well as the term landscape architect and sometimes the words architecture and architectural - is a legal definition. Use of the word is regulated through the Licensure Boards of each state. You cannot call yourself an interior architect unless you are a registered architect. Check with your state board as to how they control the use of ALL architecture-related words.

When people are registered, that fact generally sits at the top of their resume, either right after their name with the designation "Joe Blow, RA" or in a line shortly thereafter such as "Registered Architect in the states of Delaware, Kansas..." etc.

You can and should mention that your educational background is in "interior architecture", as that *should* denote a program that addresses much more significance in creating environments than does selecting throw pillows.

I hope this helps. And, before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, it's NCARB and each state's board that regulates the term, not the AIA.

Whether it be legal or not, I often refer to myself as an Interior Architect, as opposed to Interior Designer. This way I dont get roped into doing a color consultation or "window treatments" for somebody's mom. I didn't pay 50K for an intense 4 year education (alongside the arch students mind you) to be called a decorator or decorate! for that matter.

My love is architecture and design of a space...the structure of the space, how we move through space....and the elements of that space that affect how we feel and think....color, texture, light, graphics etc. I chose Interior design/architecture, whatever you want to call it, because I feel that it is more artistic and dynamic than just architecture alone. In a sense, it is an art installation...I am providing an memorable experience to the user which to me, is more rewarding than placing HVAC.

Liberty bell: I appreciate your response, and I will look into the legal definitions. I was considering the term "architectural designer"....as opposed to Interior Architect because yes, it turns out you do need to be licensed as such. I wonder if these "Interior Architecture" programs prepare you for licensing for both NCIDQ and the NCARB?? I think that would answer my intial question...

This just came to mind: If the use of the word architect is regulated, is that also true for technical proffesions such as "informational architect" or "data architect"...hmmm....

Oh, sai, it's a murky, nasty, maze-like quandary you've wandered into...

Information architect is not a regulated term, but it's a rampant mis-use of what *is* a regulated term. I think the general sense has been that what information architects do is not so closely related to what architects do as to cause confusion (except on job postings). On the other hand, this isn't true for interior design work.

You say I didn't pay 50K for an intense 4 year education (alongside the arch students mind you) to be called a decorator or decorate! for that matter.

Well look at it from my side: I didn't pay $40K for an intensive 5-year plus 2-year education plus do an intensive 3-year internship process plus study for and pass an intensive 9-part exam to gain the legal right to use a title only to see someone who didn't bother with all that advertise themselves as having done so. I'm not saying you didn't work hard and get a really strong education, I'm certainly not saying you're not a better designer than me (I'm not a very good designer), but I *am* saying I, and other registered architects, completed a more demanding and legally defined process than you did. This is why I bristle when someone who isn't an architect calls themselves one. This is also why I really feel that "interior architecture" programs are really blatantly misleading their students.

Also, I spend a lot of my time picking fabric and designing curtains. I'm not looking down on what interior designers - or even decorators - do; if they do it well it's all good. I only object to the use of a legally regulated term by people who didn't follow the process.

Liberty Bell, that is completely understandable, The same goes for us designers pointing our noses down at those who call themselves interior designers, who havent received a degree from a University, they are just merely housewife decorators. Unfortunately, unless your state has a "title act" or "practice act" ...anyone can call themselves a designer without having taken the NCIDQ exam. If all states would adopt these acts, then Interior Design would be regarded as an actual profession that requires licensing..along with architects, lawyers, etc...I think we, as designers, are looking for something concrete to grasp onto. The term "interior architect" sounds more reputable and respectable at this point in the game. Plus, I am always having to explain what an Interior Designer does. You say Interior Architect...and they get it.

What I didnt mention is that I am a recent graduate....haven't even gotten that "real" job yet! ...I have been doing internships for the last several years and am just beginning to consider taking the NCIDQ , and getting LEED certified to be "legal". So no, I am nowhere near actually calling myself anything...yet.

So I guess my question is now...who the hell came up with this term "interior architect" and how is it defined? And if you are required to be licensed to be titled this, then what difference is there between Architect, and Interior Architect? And how is it that schools have adopted this as a degree, when they are essentially getting interior design training?

Good lord.

"Good lord" is exactly the right response to the questions to your last paragraph, sai! I'm still flummoxed as to how/why schools are using the term - it would appear that they are NOT being straightforward with their incoming students about the fact that an Interior Architecture degree is *not* a degree that can be accredited towards getting an architecture license at all, which is why I say above I feel like it's deceptive on the schools' parts.

Personally, I think an Interior Design title or practice act is a decent idea - I certainly don't feel threatened by it, as some architects do (I think I actually submitted a letter opposing a title act in our state many years ago, but I've since changed my mind on the topic, and I think it passed anyway).

And yes, I totally understand your frustration with Ms. Bored Housewife who just decides one day to hang out a shingle calling herself a "designer". Again, she may be very talented, which is most important, but it is frustrating nonetheless.

I believe Illinois does have a practice act for Interior Design.

Furthermore, architects, as well as Structural engineers (go figure), are automatically granted use of the title. It is considered a sub-set of architecture and quite limiting what you can - and can not do.

Okay, not that wikepedia is a reliable resource but I am going to quote it anyway....they say Interior Architecture:

"The National Center for Education Statistics's definition of Interior Architecture: "A program that prepares individuals to apply architectural principles in the design of structural interiors for living, recreational, and business purposes and to function as professional interior architects. Includes instruction in architecture, structural systems design, heating and cooling systems, occupational and safety standards, interior design, specific end-use applications, and professional responsibilities and standards."

However, a practicing professional cannot use the title of "Interior Architect" unless they complete the requirements for becoming a registered or licensed architect.

In mainland Europe (that is excluding the anglo-Saxon countries) the term "Interior Architecture" is generally used to describe what is defined in North America as "Interior Design" with a few exceptions. In many European countries the use of the title "Interior Architect" is legally regulated. For more information see ECIA [1]"

Sounds like a vague representation of both feilds. I say get licensed in both, then call yourself whatever the hell you want. I am so confused.

dsc_arch- illinois does not have a "practice" act for ID. Only 4 states do and one (Florida) has just been sued claiming their practice act is unconstitutional and discriminatory. I suspect that practice act will be overturned. There is so much more to this issue than I have time to post here.

sai- I am an interior designer. I have a degree in architecture and interior design. I am a straight male. I have been subjected to the prima donna diva decorator stereotype my entire career. Early on it used to bother me enough that I would feign my career as architect or interior architect knowing full well it was technically illegal. Since it was limited to awkward social situations it was merely a lie/misrepresentation and not a legal actionable issue. I feel your pain. But stick with me here you have got to make a decision. You are either an interior designer and are willing to fight with us to overcome the stereotype OR you will take the ARE and register yourself as an architect. You can not on one hand practice "interior design" and call yourself an interior "architect" without proper credentials. DO THE RIGHT THING

Listen to liberty bell he (I assume) knows what he is talking about. Interior Architecture schools are very much so misrepresenting their degrees. They are interior design degrees. The programs are accredited by Interior Designers. They glom on to the interior architect moniker simply because of the implied prestige and professional connotation. This is not simply an issue of interchangeable semantics- it is a legal, ethical and moral issue that affects a lot of career paths and professional domains involving lots of money and yes even a few egos.

Right on, dudek!!

Seriously, great post. BTW, I'm a woman, not that it matters in the context of this conversation, though given that my business partner is male, but I'm a registered architect and he is a registered interior designer, I do feel you on fighting the stereotypes.

OUCH!
My apologies Liberty Bell. Women architects...straight male designers....what is the world coming to?
Thanks for your comments.

Does too!

Short title. This Act may be cited as the Interior Design Title Act.

http://ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1341&ChapAct=225%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B310%2F&ChapterID=24&ChapterName=PROFESSIONS+AND+OCCUPATIONS&ActName=Interior+Design+Title+Act

I guess I am a ID too!

Nothing in this Act or any other Act shall prevent a licensed architect from practicing interior design services or from using the title "interior designer" or "residential interior designer". Nothing in this Act shall be construed as requiring the services of an interior designer or residential interior designer for the interior designing of a single family residence.

so interior architect: first term not regulated; second term regulated and self sufficient: an interior architect is an architect. adjective indicative of 'specialty' service within the architectural field ('health care' architect, for instance) holds far more signifying value than the noun being indicative of 'specialty service' within the interior designing field.

dsc_arch Indiana has a title registry. It is not a practice act.
There is a difference.