I've been reading the forums for a while now. I've been recently trying to participate.
I'm noticing a trend here about who to blame for the industry being the way that it is and trying to find a root cause (as my recent interests have been in the HR and accounting side of architecture).
I'll list the general complaints (at least how I interpret them) as a summary.
Complaint 1-- 'The Internship'
Employers blame new employees for not have enough relevant skills vital to create a 'sustainable (profitable)' firm without an extensive and drawn out training period.
Employers put the blame on new employees not having enough 'experience' despite the fact that most fresh graduates have ostensibly more education than the people who hire them.
Employees (interns) contend that employers have themselves with limited accountability that employers demand expensive education and "relevant experience" despite actually saying what kind of experience they want. Almost no entry-level employee is going to have 5 years of experience in international commercial realty.
Complaint 2-- 'My university didn't do ______"
Employers and graduates contend that their issues are based on the status of education; that it is the schools who have failed at providing a quality, in demand knowledge to build 'relevant' skills.
It seems all three parties reach for the moon but neither of them will cooperate or compromise with one another. This is probably grossly simplifying the issues.
I'm sure that not all schools are lame ducks either as many of you educators will counter this point with "my school does this and that!"
Complaint 3-- "NCARB SUCKS"
NCARB sucks. That is the general complaint here.
The hours, testing and time involved aren't really to the benefit of anyone other than those wishing to be self employed, those in upper management or eager to be upper management.
To some people's surprise, there are some people who actually don't want to advance in their careers. Some just don't get the benefit to licensing when someone else is willing to stamp their work.
But, one big assumption we can make is that NCARB simply writes tests and makes sure buildings don't kill people. It doesn't seem like this organization goes out of its way.
It's more reactive than active... right?
Complaint 4-- "AIA SUCKS"
As someone (stone I think) pointed out in another thread... that the AIA is a conglomeration of individuals bound together by a skeleton support administration that attempts to address and work with a large group of individuals.
To say the least, it is an association. Like any democracy or representative group, it represents the actions of the most active and most vocal. It is not a legal entity like NCARB. Perhaps it should and can be more proactive but that is not really its main goal.
Like other related groups, it has gotten the heat recently for not doing what it claims or advocates doing. But what ever it isn't doing, it isn't doing it because the people who make up the AIA aren't doing it. Shared power and shared responsibility and all that.
Okay... so that was a little Too Long, Don't Reply.
It seems to me that there is the repetitive cycle of the value of knowledge and the application of that value and of that knowledge.
So, really, unless a bunch of people want to fess up... the only people left to seriously look at are NAAB. Mind you, a large part of accreditation is self-administered and peer reviewed.
These colleges right their own studies and then hand them out to other universities and professionals who weigh in.
It's intellectual inbreeding at best. If anyone was going to change anything or be exceptionally critical, they would alienate themselves from the academic circle. And for those outside of tenure, finger wagging is career suicide.
So, if you want to start changing the basics of the industry... you could start with the group who says what is and what isn't worth learning and who get to teach what and to whom.
So, perhaps, key parties could be getting together here to voice their opinions and insight on what changes, reforms or current concepts should be instituted and what needs to go.
We are a highly diverse profession, made up of highly diverse individuals who think about our circumstances in highly diverse ways. Like some countries, we tend to be ungovernable. We are a product of who we are as individuals. Until we start acting differently as individuals, not much is likely to change across the broader landscape.
The NAAB has allowed way too many colleges and universities to have accredited Architecture programs, IMHO.
While I agree that fresh arch grads are generally not prepared for what a real world architecture firm runs like, I still think the degree needs to be well rounded in the liberal arts. Now design studios should have some basis in reality but I don't want to turn the degree into something similar to what techincal colleges do.
Re: what could be different though, how to change *us*... I think for one, actually more emphasis should be placed on practice and professional licensure... Tie work programs and the whole idp + are process into the education system... What if graduation meant defending a thesis and then writing the are exams and completing idp at the same time? Also the school system and profession needs as a community to be less isolated, needs to connect with the broader professional and business communities... More emphasis on industry and planning and design businesses, community engagement and less elitism... Creative business leadership and organization... Communications... Marketing. Entrepeneurship. Development. Sustainability. Delivery processes. Things that should be encouraged in school education...
Maybe all of those organizations- NAAB, NCARB, the AIA, USGBC, our schools should be more interconnected somehow... Made more efficient and relevant to our industry...
Aquapura, agree with broad liberal arts value, but this really needs to be more of a practice focused education... It's still a design profession, theoretical thinking and creativity is part of that, but I think what will give our profession more horsepower vs other professions like MBAs or law or medical professions is if we have the hard skills to back it up... Not saying make it more like a technical school, not make it easier, if anything, demand more...
Besides... You don't need to go to professional school if you want to focus on liberal arts... You can do that as your undergraduate degree or do a dual degree like an MA or a PHD... IMHO we need to distinguish professional training as something high level, but rigorous in it's useful technical application in the industry... 2 cents, not sure...
Maybe integrating work programs with the degree would do it...
NAAB has gutted the profession of viability in the marketplace...too much art, irrational BS not enough logic, business sense and work ethic (and no all nighters are not reflective of a wise application on a good work ethic---quite the opposite actually).
The AIA is a Union in every practical sense of the word. Ever notice that the marketplace still takes PEs seriously? Is it a coincidence that Archs typically call themselves John Doe, AIA to the exclusion of R.A. and Engs call themselves John Doe, P.E. to the exclusion of ASCE? Now I now I might be better at mathematics and recognizing patterns than most artistically inclined people on this forum but there is definitely an obvious pattern here.
The number of NAAB arch schools is only increasing so you can count on even LESS demand for GREATER supply of "artistically" inclined morons flooding the profession every year.
If I may, you forgot one major complaint 5 montagneux:
Computers and the corporations that leverage their necessity on the profession. By reinventing processes and techniques every five years (AutoCAD to REvit for example) the profession is doing itself a MAJOR disservice and undercutting any remaining leverage it might have (after being decimated by complaints 1-4).
The Intern Development Program is a far cry from what the role of the "apprentice" and "master builder" use to be back in the day. No matter how much effort you put into rebuilding/correcting/reformulating acadamia there will always be the necessity to learn beyond what you gain in any institution. The architectural profession is incredibly diverse as emphasised by others in this thread, which makes it all the more difficult to fill the void. Understanding professional practice, codes, structural implications will vary given a particular site, program, municipalities, et cetra. How can you include all these variables into a single degree? Should architectural institutions be broken down into a schools of archetypes (ie. affordable housing, mixed-use, TOD's, high-rise, single family, commercial, education, medical, and on the list goes)?
What about having the MArch with registration as a general practice credential, similar to say MD, and then have specializations. In medical practice for example, an MD is the basic general practice requiement, but then there are those who pursue additional specialties like psychiatry, eurologist, cardiologist, anaesthesiologist, opthamologist, dermatologist, gynocologist, pediatrics, etc. which involve post professional specialized education and certification...? I realize that there are already post professional research degrees, but it's strange that even these post professional masters and doctoral programs seem to be lumped all together and geared more towards academia rather than being specialized practice oriented programs... Would architecture benefit from having more specialists + general practitioners rather than being a profession largely comprised of generalists? There are specialists, but it seems to be less formalized than in medicine or law for example, and the avenues towards specialization seem more the rare case rather than standard...
I guess the specialists in our industry are called *engineers* :p
Is architecture then just a specialty on aesthetics?? Shouldn't every system be related to architectural design though, just as buildings like the human body are integrated systems? Or maybe the medical profession is not the correct analogy and specialties should be mire based on markets as you suggest? Maybe closer to law for example?
"Should architectural institutions be broken down into a schools of archetypes (ie. affordable housing, mixed-use, TOD's, high-rise, single family, commercial, education, medical, and on the list goes)?"
piggy - "The AIA is a Union in every practical sense of the word. "
piggy, you've outdone yourself on this one.
"A trade union (or labor union, labour union) is an organization of workers who have banded together to achieve common goals in key areas, such as working conditions. The trade union, through its leadership, bargains with the employer on behalf of union members (rank and file members) and negotiates labor contracts (Collective bargaining) with employers. This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employer and in some cases on other non-member workers."
The AIA is nothing at all like a Union, or even a Guild for that matter. It is a Professional Association.
"A professional association (also called a professional body, professional organization, or professional society) is a non-profit organization seeking to further a particular profession, the interests of individuals engaged in that profession, and the public interest."
"Would architecture benefit from having more specialists + general practitioners rather than being a profession largely comprised of generalists?"
This is a major reason why I'm seroiusly thinking about obtaining the S.E. license (back to school and all that)
Other reasons include: most "artist" types that have flooded the profession with cheap, interchangeable type labor will be scared/ incapable/ uninterested in all the mathematics. Since they've been weeded into the profession the last 15 years I guess I'm feeling like my last resort is to weed myself out and into something that still has leverage in terms of "Master Builder" credentials.
"...an organization of (members) who have banded together to achieve common goals in key areas, such as (practicing) conditions. The professional union, through its leadership, bargains with the employe(es) on behalf of union members (rank and file members) and negotiates labor (strike contracts of course) (Collective bargaining) with employe(es). This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employ(es) and in some cases on other non-member workers.""
EXACTLY.
Call it whatever you want...in application the AIA is a de facto UNION if nothing else.
Of course, the lawyers (granted special AIA membership) will deny to their last breath that they are a union...might lose their tax exemption status' and .org designations and host of phony quasi government realtionships with Senators/ lobbyists and their ilk
The AIA isn't a union, it is a professional association. It doesn't negotiate wages or benefits or serve as collective bargaining with employers... If anything, I think most employees aren't a part of the AIA, it's the employers that comprise the AIA and the AIA services the profession's dealings with other parties, with clients, contractors, consultants, and the public...
That sounds like the definition of professional association.
Re: specialization
But the point is, architects are already the MD. They are the genralists already. The structural engineer alone without an architectural background is not trained as a building design generalist with knowledge of space design, aesthetic considerations, building envelope, interiors, lighting, mechanical, electrical, space planning, acoustics etc., a strucural designer is just that: is only a specialist without the MD. A structural engineer is one specialist and goes into an exceeding amount of detail above the generalist architect, but the architect has a generalist knowledge of all those things including structures.
The difference here is: in building vs. Medical school, specialists are consultants only without the generalist requirement... An engineer is not required to first have a broad architectural degree as a prerequisite. That's not to say that your decision to take structures is not a valuable addition to the m arch but that's another four years of schooling since the two paths are not complementary... An alternative would be do a 4 year b Eng and follow up with a 3 year m arch but it seems counter intuitive to me that the specialized knowledge comes first... Where is the avenue for architects to specialize as it follows directly from our field of work?
man, if the AIA is the union for architects, it is the worst union ever
of course if they were a union (which they clearly are not) they would be getting anyone associated with architecture to pay dues, not have it be voluntary
think of all the CAD monkeys that could be paying dues
And Cad monkeys, recent Arch school grads (0-20 years) haven't been paying dues worth hundred of thousands, indeed millions, if not a few billion over the years in artificially low wages and low/ constantly being reduced benefits?
The worst thing is they are unofficial members without a vote in policy even.
And in reply to whoever said that the AIA doesn't negotiate wages: Do some research into the process the AIA goes to to get their Compensation Reports published every other year. If thats not negotiation then Snow White was sheltered by six dwarfs.
Wow...so many people did not learn a thing in school since they still believe that the AIA is a "professional organization" and definitely not a union all because the AIA said so.
If the AIA publishes an article on their website that all Architects and aspiring architects are going to make 100k a year for the rest of their lives with a full benefit package and a fat pension when they retire...would you believe them? Why not? Think about it...
So you are waiting for someone else to inform you of the truth? probably, you are not alone, most people are doing this these days.
Yes, the AIA, one way or another collects and then redistributes billions of dollars in lost wages and compensation for Architects, CAD monkeys, interior designers, etc. Yes, absolutely.
If the average pay for an MArch out of school is 35K (which it is) and an engineer is making 57K right out of undergrad that translates after adjusting for time to the 10 years following school of 2 architects getting paid what engineer is paid.
The AIA has been doing this for many, many years.
Also, I just came across another official AIA publication that overtly LIES and states that IDP if 3 years (when the average time is 10.5 years according to the data).
AIA+NCARB+NAAB equals the triangle of lies. But "they aren't a union because in court the lawyers all say its a professional organization"...yeah, and lawyers and bankers are soo trustworthy.
It's not a lie Piggy
my IDP lasted 3 years and 2 months
If you count up the hours required, it comes to around 3 years
Just because people take longer to do it doesnt make it a lie
It is up to the individual and their employer to decide how long it will take for the hours to be accumulated
I dont really understand all this hate you have against the AIA and the profession in general, Piggy
And if that is the average pay for an M.Arch out of school (which i have no doubt is true, i just havent checked), i feel lucky as i got more than than coming out of school
I personally am not a member of the AIA, so i dont care much, but how exactly are they collecting on lost wages of CAD monkeys?
I just dont understand this "truth" you are laying down for us all
And i still dont understand why you spend your days here when you say you are leaving the profession
Don't be stupid, pleeaassee. I am so sick of ignorant emo retards being willfully and consciously ignorant.
I said the average time is 10.5 years according to the data! And it is! I'm not making this up ask me to cite my sources and I will spend the time to post them to this thread!
I am so freaking fed up with morons in the profession that are taught and let their minds get polluted with an obsession for the exception rather than the general rule. THis is exactly why no one cares what architects think except architects themselves.
There will always be exceptions and that is not what matters in the bigger picture with any profession including and esp. architecture.
Also I can send you at least two sources (one is the AIA compensation report itself that says 35K for MArch) if you ask. That figure is likely to be even lower now, though I guess with the marketplace taking a nosedive the last year and a half.
also I have said nothing about hate? Do you have kids? I have two. One is potty training right now and pooped on the bathroom floor a few minutes ago. She did the same thing last night. I didn't spank her last night but gave her a lecture. Tonight I gave her a little wake up swat. She thought it was funny until she felt that. I love her obviously. Sometimes though love isn't all fun and games despite what your favorite arch professor told you (most of mine didn't have kids or any real investment in the long term future).
"I personally am not a member of the AIA, so i dont care much, but how exactly are they collecting on lost wages of CAD monkeys?"
One day you might get it and when you do it will likely be too late unfortunately.
"I just dont understand this "truth" you are laying down for us all
And i still dont understand why you spend your days here when you say you are leaving the profession"
Reference my earlier post about my kid that pooped to answer this one.
I am in the AIA. It has nothing whatsoever to do with unions. You're blinded by bitterness.
Everyone else here: good job trying to convince Piggy with levelheaded arguments. For me, this is the last post with which I'll ever address his/her opinions. S/he's insisting on calling me a moron. Why would I spend my time - time, by the way, for which I'm generously compensated by clients who want the services I offer as a licensed architect - trying to sway an angry mind that's already made up?
Also, aquapura, I agree with you - I do think there are too many accredited schools. I also think the shift to mostly MArch programs instead of mostly BArch programs was a mistake. But I don't have the energy to engage in that debate with anyone. I'm spending a lot of time this semester trying to teach my MArch students the hard knocks of professional practice - another reason why I don't have time to respond to dumb posts on Archinect. My students, bless them, are smart, and are keeping me on my toes.
It's wonderful to see how many people in their 30s and 40s got licensed and work in architecture firms without real or bonafide architectural degrees.
I was just hoping to open a dialogue here because I see NAAB as more or less being in control of setting tghe level of intellectual coherence. I did search and found a mr. barry lerman's post about a year ago about the 2009 accreditation standards and have been reading them now.
Too many schools? Interesting idea. Do you think perhaps as far as state schools go that it would be better to have one school with one big centralized architecture department over 3 or 4 smaller departments in a state university system?
Like how many UT or UC architecture schools are there?
"I am so sick of ignorant emo retards being willfully and consciously ignorant."
That statement right there shows everyone how much your posts are worth if you resort to calling people things like this and others you have been throwing out all over the place since you got here, at myself and others
If your arguments are reduced to you calling people names, I wonder how valid they actually are.
I am well aware of your sources, i just pointed out that the AIA was not lying when it said that IDP is 3 years
It is very clearly stated how many hours are required to fulfill the IDP requirements. And they add up to about 3 years, as evidence by mine and your IDP taking about 3 years.
If you want to call that a lie, go ahead, but it clearly is true.
I also said that i completely believed your statement about the salary. I dont know why you would need to send me sources to prove something i believe completely? You sound a little on the defensive
Just because you dont feel you are compensated enough for your work as an architect doesnt make it a universal fact for everyone. I am well compensated for my work, and I am only 29 years old and not yet licensed. If i have any issues with my career, i will actually try to fix them rather than spend my days ranting on a website about the evils of the AIA and putting the blame on anyone and everyone else but myself. It is your career, no one is holding you back. If something isnt to your liking......go fix it?
it probably wont work opening a dialogue here montagneux, as this thread along with a couple others have been hijacked
But it's worth a shot. I agree that the switch and back and forth between a B.Arch and M.Arch could be part of the problem, along with there being too many schools accredited. I wonder if just one degree could eventually work out if it became universal? If it was just an M.Arch and the B.Arch was done away with. I wonder if that would lessen the number of schools accredited, which seems like a reasonable idea that might bring about a solution.
liberty bell you are definitely the reason why emos should not be entrenched in the education of future Architects. I am licensed I am glad that you are at least as well. It is a shame you defer to a source outside yourself for legitimacy (the AIA).
~ Just as a general public service note, please dont bother responding to Piggy or whatever he decides to call himself next. Im sure paul will get around to banning him again, until then I guess we'll have to step around the dogshit.
the AIA is not a union. I used to belong to two IATSE locals when I was working in Hollywood. the differences between them is night and day. No, the AIA is NOT a union (but sometimes I wish it was). Once, the AIA colluded to set minimum fees, but the justice department defanged the association into the modern lobbying organization that it now is.
NAAB doesn't propose that new programs start, they just set the minimums for the curriculum to ensure a standard of competency of the graduates. if there are too many graduates, you can only blame the universities and all the wannabe architecture students clamoring to get into the profession for that, not the NAAB.
NCARB is supposed to be the gatekeeper to ensure that only folks with a minimum level of experience (read competency) get to take the exams through the administration of IDP. NCARB and IDP have both helped and hurt the profession. They helped by establishing national standards to enable easy reciprocity and licensure in other state. They hurt the profession by having such a narrow eye of the needle for what sorts of experience are required to meet their standard (if you deviate from being a generalist intern for those three+ years, you're screwed). But then, NCARB doesn't answer to us architects, it answers to the state architecture boards who must ensure the health, safety and welfare of their citizens.
For oe the answer is none, they will be offended no matter what.
Dogshit? Wow really persuasive, eloquent critical thinking skills you've developed there oe.
I think when I was in the 5th grade this was the level of rebuttal that got respect on the playground. And most of those kids who traded blows over such words are in jail now.
Well, no marmkid. Moron and retard are words in the dictionary that I feel I can logically connect to the ideas as expressed by certain forum members at certain times.
Calling an idea or another forum member dogshit is definately moronic, retardiculous, and immature because how can dogshit get transmitted over the internet? As far as I know that capability has not been invented (yet at least).
However, moronic propositions (ideas) are in transmitted in abundance.
there are many words in the dictionary, Piggy
That doesnt make the use of them in this discussion mature by any means, and certainly not in the way you used them
no need to respond any further please, i only posted to click off the notification box so i can stop getting email updates for this thread which lost any useful discussion early on unfortunately
I'm glad. Perhaps you've finally learned the meaning and application behind the nursery rhymes I learned in my youth:
I'm rubber, you are glue
Everything you say, bounces off me
And sticks on you
Sticks and Stones
May Hurt my bones
But words will never hurt me
It seems that most people these days either forgot this rhyme and its meaning or have forgotten that in enlightened societies it a choice to receive offense and its esp. self destructive to look for receiving offense and choose to give it place to fester.
Ultimately it is your choice to read what I have to say, interpret what I have to say in what manner you choose, and to react (or not) however you ultimately choose. I cannot force that, it is entirely up to you.
I would understand what the AIA was except I don't actually work or know anything. Mostly I just write racist things on the internet all day to conceal my crushing insecurities.
I'm not an AIA member by choice. I value my soul more than what they have to offer.
By the way where the whole "racist" thing is going is:
1. all fighting bad
2. all hate leads to fighting
3. any mention of race by a white person leads to hate
4. on the pain of banishment and pain of death, a white person must never mention the "forbidden" topic of race
5. in "fact", it doesn't even exist anymore (according to the "brainiacs" in academia)
6. loss of freedom and the possession of one's own identity and soul.
7. enter the state to step in and possess it
I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see where this equation deviates from common sense.
I wonder if you've ever unplugged from MTV long enough to have heard of this guy: Noel Ignatiev
"Noel Ignatiev is an American history professor at the Massachusetts College of Art best known for his call to "abolish" the white race, which he defines as "white privilege and race identity.":
He is one of the primary generators of the retardiculous notion that "race is a social construct"
I wonder that all the other races that still have at least some remnant of self respect and pride left would think if for example this entrenched professor would call to abolish the "Oriental" or "Negro" or "Mexican" race?
really this is just a carefully designed play on words designed to dupe idiots into redirecting their otherwise well intentioned resources into the contemporary multiCULTuralism cartel.
This is the crowd that is truly full of hateful, extermination loving racists.
Think about it...if you can...again, brains are definitely annoying sometimes but I promise it won't hurt too much.
Feb 10, 10 7:29 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.
NAAB-- is it the boogeyman?
I've been reading the forums for a while now. I've been recently trying to participate.
I'm noticing a trend here about who to blame for the industry being the way that it is and trying to find a root cause (as my recent interests have been in the HR and accounting side of architecture).
I'll list the general complaints (at least how I interpret them) as a summary.
Complaint 1-- 'The Internship'
Employers blame new employees for not have enough relevant skills vital to create a 'sustainable (profitable)' firm without an extensive and drawn out training period.
Employers put the blame on new employees not having enough 'experience' despite the fact that most fresh graduates have ostensibly more education than the people who hire them.
Employees (interns) contend that employers have themselves with limited accountability that employers demand expensive education and "relevant experience" despite actually saying what kind of experience they want. Almost no entry-level employee is going to have 5 years of experience in international commercial realty.
Complaint 2-- 'My university didn't do ______"
Employers and graduates contend that their issues are based on the status of education; that it is the schools who have failed at providing a quality, in demand knowledge to build 'relevant' skills.
It seems all three parties reach for the moon but neither of them will cooperate or compromise with one another. This is probably grossly simplifying the issues.
I'm sure that not all schools are lame ducks either as many of you educators will counter this point with "my school does this and that!"
Complaint 3-- "NCARB SUCKS"
NCARB sucks. That is the general complaint here.
The hours, testing and time involved aren't really to the benefit of anyone other than those wishing to be self employed, those in upper management or eager to be upper management.
To some people's surprise, there are some people who actually don't want to advance in their careers. Some just don't get the benefit to licensing when someone else is willing to stamp their work.
But, one big assumption we can make is that NCARB simply writes tests and makes sure buildings don't kill people. It doesn't seem like this organization goes out of its way.
It's more reactive than active... right?
Complaint 4-- "AIA SUCKS"
As someone (stone I think) pointed out in another thread... that the AIA is a conglomeration of individuals bound together by a skeleton support administration that attempts to address and work with a large group of individuals.
To say the least, it is an association. Like any democracy or representative group, it represents the actions of the most active and most vocal. It is not a legal entity like NCARB. Perhaps it should and can be more proactive but that is not really its main goal.
Like other related groups, it has gotten the heat recently for not doing what it claims or advocates doing. But what ever it isn't doing, it isn't doing it because the people who make up the AIA aren't doing it. Shared power and shared responsibility and all that.
Okay... so that was a little Too Long, Don't Reply.
It seems to me that there is the repetitive cycle of the value of knowledge and the application of that value and of that knowledge.
So, really, unless a bunch of people want to fess up... the only people left to seriously look at are NAAB. Mind you, a large part of accreditation is self-administered and peer reviewed.
These colleges right their own studies and then hand them out to other universities and professionals who weigh in.
It's intellectual inbreeding at best. If anyone was going to change anything or be exceptionally critical, they would alienate themselves from the academic circle. And for those outside of tenure, finger wagging is career suicide.
So, if you want to start changing the basics of the industry... you could start with the group who says what is and what isn't worth learning and who get to teach what and to whom.
So, perhaps, key parties could be getting together here to voice their opinions and insight on what changes, reforms or current concepts should be instituted and what needs to go.
Any thoughts, comments or hate mail?
IMO, there is no "boogeyman"
We are a highly diverse profession, made up of highly diverse individuals who think about our circumstances in highly diverse ways. Like some countries, we tend to be ungovernable. We are a product of who we are as individuals. Until we start acting differently as individuals, not much is likely to change across the broader landscape.
The NAAB has allowed way too many colleges and universities to have accredited Architecture programs, IMHO.
While I agree that fresh arch grads are generally not prepared for what a real world architecture firm runs like, I still think the degree needs to be well rounded in the liberal arts. Now design studios should have some basis in reality but I don't want to turn the degree into something similar to what techincal colleges do.
Agree with stone...
Re: what could be different though, how to change *us*... I think for one, actually more emphasis should be placed on practice and professional licensure... Tie work programs and the whole idp + are process into the education system... What if graduation meant defending a thesis and then writing the are exams and completing idp at the same time? Also the school system and profession needs as a community to be less isolated, needs to connect with the broader professional and business communities... More emphasis on industry and planning and design businesses, community engagement and less elitism... Creative business leadership and organization... Communications... Marketing. Entrepeneurship. Development. Sustainability. Delivery processes. Things that should be encouraged in school education...
Maybe all of those organizations- NAAB, NCARB, the AIA, USGBC, our schools should be more interconnected somehow... Made more efficient and relevant to our industry...
Aquapura, agree with broad liberal arts value, but this really needs to be more of a practice focused education... It's still a design profession, theoretical thinking and creativity is part of that, but I think what will give our profession more horsepower vs other professions like MBAs or law or medical professions is if we have the hard skills to back it up... Not saying make it more like a technical school, not make it easier, if anything, demand more...
Besides... You don't need to go to professional school if you want to focus on liberal arts... You can do that as your undergraduate degree or do a dual degree like an MA or a PHD... IMHO we need to distinguish professional training as something high level, but rigorous in it's useful technical application in the industry... 2 cents, not sure...
Maybe integrating work programs with the degree would do it...
NAAB has gutted the profession of viability in the marketplace...too much art, irrational BS not enough logic, business sense and work ethic (and no all nighters are not reflective of a wise application on a good work ethic---quite the opposite actually).
The AIA is a Union in every practical sense of the word. Ever notice that the marketplace still takes PEs seriously? Is it a coincidence that Archs typically call themselves John Doe, AIA to the exclusion of R.A. and Engs call themselves John Doe, P.E. to the exclusion of ASCE? Now I now I might be better at mathematics and recognizing patterns than most artistically inclined people on this forum but there is definitely an obvious pattern here.
The number of NAAB arch schools is only increasing so you can count on even LESS demand for GREATER supply of "artistically" inclined morons flooding the profession every year.
If I may, you forgot one major complaint 5 montagneux:
Computers and the corporations that leverage their necessity on the profession. By reinventing processes and techniques every five years (AutoCAD to REvit for example) the profession is doing itself a MAJOR disservice and undercutting any remaining leverage it might have (after being decimated by complaints 1-4).
The Intern Development Program is a far cry from what the role of the "apprentice" and "master builder" use to be back in the day. No matter how much effort you put into rebuilding/correcting/reformulating acadamia there will always be the necessity to learn beyond what you gain in any institution. The architectural profession is incredibly diverse as emphasised by others in this thread, which makes it all the more difficult to fill the void. Understanding professional practice, codes, structural implications will vary given a particular site, program, municipalities, et cetra. How can you include all these variables into a single degree? Should architectural institutions be broken down into a schools of archetypes (ie. affordable housing, mixed-use, TOD's, high-rise, single family, commercial, education, medical, and on the list goes)?
What about having the MArch with registration as a general practice credential, similar to say MD, and then have specializations. In medical practice for example, an MD is the basic general practice requiement, but then there are those who pursue additional specialties like psychiatry, eurologist, cardiologist, anaesthesiologist, opthamologist, dermatologist, gynocologist, pediatrics, etc. which involve post professional specialized education and certification...? I realize that there are already post professional research degrees, but it's strange that even these post professional masters and doctoral programs seem to be lumped all together and geared more towards academia rather than being specialized practice oriented programs... Would architecture benefit from having more specialists + general practitioners rather than being a profession largely comprised of generalists? There are specialists, but it seems to be less formalized than in medicine or law for example, and the avenues towards specialization seem more the rare case rather than standard...
I guess the specialists in our industry are called *engineers* :p
Is architecture then just a specialty on aesthetics?? Shouldn't every system be related to architectural design though, just as buildings like the human body are integrated systems? Or maybe the medical profession is not the correct analogy and specialties should be mire based on markets as you suggest? Maybe closer to law for example?
lesro's idea is tantalizing:
"Should architectural institutions be broken down into a schools of archetypes (ie. affordable housing, mixed-use, TOD's, high-rise, single family, commercial, education, medical, and on the list goes)?"
"What about having the MArch with registration as a general practice credential, similar to say MD, and then have specializations. "
won't work....the entire NAAB system is based on graduating as many warm bodies to plug into corporatized software programs a year as possible.
Lets not make the erroneous assumption (doesn't mean assumptions in general are invalid) that the profession is honest as currently structured.
piggy - "The AIA is a Union in every practical sense of the word. "
piggy, you've outdone yourself on this one.
"A trade union (or labor union, labour union) is an organization of workers who have banded together to achieve common goals in key areas, such as working conditions. The trade union, through its leadership, bargains with the employer on behalf of union members (rank and file members) and negotiates labor contracts (Collective bargaining) with employers. This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employer and in some cases on other non-member workers."
The AIA is nothing at all like a Union, or even a Guild for that matter. It is a Professional Association.
"A professional association (also called a professional body, professional organization, or professional society) is a non-profit organization seeking to further a particular profession, the interests of individuals engaged in that profession, and the public interest."
"Would architecture benefit from having more specialists + general practitioners rather than being a profession largely comprised of generalists?"
This is a major reason why I'm seroiusly thinking about obtaining the S.E. license (back to school and all that)
Other reasons include: most "artist" types that have flooded the profession with cheap, interchangeable type labor will be scared/ incapable/ uninterested in all the mathematics. Since they've been weeded into the profession the last 15 years I guess I'm feeling like my last resort is to weed myself out and into something that still has leverage in terms of "Master Builder" credentials.
"Is architecture then just a specialty on aesthetics?? "
Exactly the very problem why the profession isn't economically viable...or dare I say its "unsustainable"....
Couldn't have been said better, I'm going to remember thsi one "specialty in aesthetics"...that is going to be classic.
The AIA is essentially the following:
"...an organization of (members) who have banded together to achieve common goals in key areas, such as (practicing) conditions. The professional union, through its leadership, bargains with the employe(es) on behalf of union members (rank and file members) and negotiates labor (strike contracts of course) (Collective bargaining) with employe(es). This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employ(es) and in some cases on other non-member workers.""
EXACTLY.
Call it whatever you want...in application the AIA is a de facto UNION if nothing else.
Of course, the lawyers (granted special AIA membership) will deny to their last breath that they are a union...might lose their tax exemption status' and .org designations and host of phony quasi government realtionships with Senators/ lobbyists and their ilk
The AIA isn't a union, it is a professional association. It doesn't negotiate wages or benefits or serve as collective bargaining with employers... If anything, I think most employees aren't a part of the AIA, it's the employers that comprise the AIA and the AIA services the profession's dealings with other parties, with clients, contractors, consultants, and the public...
That sounds like the definition of professional association.
Re: specialization
But the point is, architects are already the MD. They are the genralists already. The structural engineer alone without an architectural background is not trained as a building design generalist with knowledge of space design, aesthetic considerations, building envelope, interiors, lighting, mechanical, electrical, space planning, acoustics etc., a strucural designer is just that: is only a specialist without the MD. A structural engineer is one specialist and goes into an exceeding amount of detail above the generalist architect, but the architect has a generalist knowledge of all those things including structures.
The difference here is: in building vs. Medical school, specialists are consultants only without the generalist requirement... An engineer is not required to first have a broad architectural degree as a prerequisite. That's not to say that your decision to take structures is not a valuable addition to the m arch but that's another four years of schooling since the two paths are not complementary... An alternative would be do a 4 year b Eng and follow up with a 3 year m arch but it seems counter intuitive to me that the specialized knowledge comes first... Where is the avenue for architects to specialize as it follows directly from our field of work?
how deliciously ironic.
man, if the AIA is the union for architects, it is the worst union ever
of course if they were a union (which they clearly are not) they would be getting anyone associated with architecture to pay dues, not have it be voluntary
think of all the CAD monkeys that could be paying dues
montagneux: great link. serves them right. Ranked #1 huh? exactly.
seriously marmkid? WOW.
And Cad monkeys, recent Arch school grads (0-20 years) haven't been paying dues worth hundred of thousands, indeed millions, if not a few billion over the years in artificially low wages and low/ constantly being reduced benefits?
The worst thing is they are unofficial members without a vote in policy even.
And in reply to whoever said that the AIA doesn't negotiate wages: Do some research into the process the AIA goes to to get their Compensation Reports published every other year. If thats not negotiation then Snow White was sheltered by six dwarfs.
Wow...so many people did not learn a thing in school since they still believe that the AIA is a "professional organization" and definitely not a union all because the AIA said so.
If the AIA publishes an article on their website that all Architects and aspiring architects are going to make 100k a year for the rest of their lives with a full benefit package and a fat pension when they retire...would you believe them? Why not? Think about it...
um, yeah?
so you are saying that the AIA union is collecting these millions of dollars of dues?
they are unofficial members of a union that doesnt exist
of course i was obviously joking in my post, though, which you didnt seem to pick up on?
seriously though
the AIA is not a union
And i didnt need them to tell me that
Actually i dont remember them commenting on the subject one way or the other
So you are waiting for someone else to inform you of the truth? probably, you are not alone, most people are doing this these days.
Yes, the AIA, one way or another collects and then redistributes billions of dollars in lost wages and compensation for Architects, CAD monkeys, interior designers, etc. Yes, absolutely.
If the average pay for an MArch out of school is 35K (which it is) and an engineer is making 57K right out of undergrad that translates after adjusting for time to the 10 years following school of 2 architects getting paid what engineer is paid.
The AIA has been doing this for many, many years.
Also, I just came across another official AIA publication that overtly LIES and states that IDP if 3 years (when the average time is 10.5 years according to the data).
AIA+NCARB+NAAB equals the triangle of lies. But "they aren't a union because in court the lawyers all say its a professional organization"...yeah, and lawyers and bankers are soo trustworthy.
It's not a lie Piggy
my IDP lasted 3 years and 2 months
If you count up the hours required, it comes to around 3 years
Just because people take longer to do it doesnt make it a lie
It is up to the individual and their employer to decide how long it will take for the hours to be accumulated
I dont really understand all this hate you have against the AIA and the profession in general, Piggy
And if that is the average pay for an M.Arch out of school (which i have no doubt is true, i just havent checked), i feel lucky as i got more than than coming out of school
I personally am not a member of the AIA, so i dont care much, but how exactly are they collecting on lost wages of CAD monkeys?
I just dont understand this "truth" you are laying down for us all
And i still dont understand why you spend your days here when you say you are leaving the profession
Mine lasted 3 years.
Don't be stupid, pleeaassee. I am so sick of ignorant emo retards being willfully and consciously ignorant.
I said the average time is 10.5 years according to the data! And it is! I'm not making this up ask me to cite my sources and I will spend the time to post them to this thread!
I am so freaking fed up with morons in the profession that are taught and let their minds get polluted with an obsession for the exception rather than the general rule. THis is exactly why no one cares what architects think except architects themselves.
There will always be exceptions and that is not what matters in the bigger picture with any profession including and esp. architecture.
Also I can send you at least two sources (one is the AIA compensation report itself that says 35K for MArch) if you ask. That figure is likely to be even lower now, though I guess with the marketplace taking a nosedive the last year and a half.
also I have said nothing about hate? Do you have kids? I have two. One is potty training right now and pooped on the bathroom floor a few minutes ago. She did the same thing last night. I didn't spank her last night but gave her a lecture. Tonight I gave her a little wake up swat. She thought it was funny until she felt that. I love her obviously. Sometimes though love isn't all fun and games despite what your favorite arch professor told you (most of mine didn't have kids or any real investment in the long term future).
"I personally am not a member of the AIA, so i dont care much, but how exactly are they collecting on lost wages of CAD monkeys?"
One day you might get it and when you do it will likely be too late unfortunately.
"I just dont understand this "truth" you are laying down for us all
And i still dont understand why you spend your days here when you say you are leaving the profession"
Reference my earlier post about my kid that pooped to answer this one.
Piggy: You're not in the AIA.
I am in the AIA. It has nothing whatsoever to do with unions. You're blinded by bitterness.
Everyone else here: good job trying to convince Piggy with levelheaded arguments. For me, this is the last post with which I'll ever address his/her opinions. S/he's insisting on calling me a moron. Why would I spend my time - time, by the way, for which I'm generously compensated by clients who want the services I offer as a licensed architect - trying to sway an angry mind that's already made up?
Also, aquapura, I agree with you - I do think there are too many accredited schools. I also think the shift to mostly MArch programs instead of mostly BArch programs was a mistake. But I don't have the energy to engage in that debate with anyone. I'm spending a lot of time this semester trying to teach my MArch students the hard knocks of professional practice - another reason why I don't have time to respond to dumb posts on Archinect. My students, bless them, are smart, and are keeping me on my toes.
on a side note... a 5 year masters isn't greater than a 5 year professional degree and a 2 year masters.... just saying.....
there should never be a 5 year masters.... it should be .... b.a./m.a./p.h.d.
There's this wonderful blog posting from AIArchitect on this very subject (almost two years old to date):
http://blog.aia.org/aiarchitect/2008/01/is_an_accredited_degree_the_on.html
It's wonderful to see how many people in their 30s and 40s got licensed and work in architecture firms without real or bonafide architectural degrees.
I was just hoping to open a dialogue here because I see NAAB as more or less being in control of setting tghe level of intellectual coherence. I did search and found a mr. barry lerman's post about a year ago about the 2009 accreditation standards and have been reading them now.
Too many schools? Interesting idea. Do you think perhaps as far as state schools go that it would be better to have one school with one big centralized architecture department over 3 or 4 smaller departments in a state university system?
Like how many UT or UC architecture schools are there?
Pleeeease don't come piss on our parade and then ask us for advise on how to get to a better one....
What?
"I am so sick of ignorant emo retards being willfully and consciously ignorant."
That statement right there shows everyone how much your posts are worth if you resort to calling people things like this and others you have been throwing out all over the place since you got here, at myself and others
If your arguments are reduced to you calling people names, I wonder how valid they actually are.
I am well aware of your sources, i just pointed out that the AIA was not lying when it said that IDP is 3 years
It is very clearly stated how many hours are required to fulfill the IDP requirements. And they add up to about 3 years, as evidence by mine and your IDP taking about 3 years.
If you want to call that a lie, go ahead, but it clearly is true.
I also said that i completely believed your statement about the salary. I dont know why you would need to send me sources to prove something i believe completely? You sound a little on the defensive
Just because you dont feel you are compensated enough for your work as an architect doesnt make it a universal fact for everyone. I am well compensated for my work, and I am only 29 years old and not yet licensed. If i have any issues with my career, i will actually try to fix them rather than spend my days ranting on a website about the evils of the AIA and putting the blame on anyone and everyone else but myself. It is your career, no one is holding you back. If something isnt to your liking......go fix it?
it probably wont work opening a dialogue here montagneux, as this thread along with a couple others have been hijacked
But it's worth a shot. I agree that the switch and back and forth between a B.Arch and M.Arch could be part of the problem, along with there being too many schools accredited. I wonder if just one degree could eventually work out if it became universal? If it was just an M.Arch and the B.Arch was done away with. I wonder if that would lessen the number of schools accredited, which seems like a reasonable idea that might bring about a solution.
liberty bell you are definitely the reason why emos should not be entrenched in the education of future Architects. I am licensed I am glad that you are at least as well. It is a shame you defer to a source outside yourself for legitimacy (the AIA).
marmkid you are still obsessed with exceptions to the exclusion of the general rule.
emos galore.
Here is a riddle:
How many offenses can be given to a person before that person receives the offense?
~ Just as a general public service note, please dont bother responding to Piggy or whatever he decides to call himself next. Im sure paul will get around to banning him again, until then I guess we'll have to step around the dogshit.
I still wonder why some of my coworkers pay for their AIA fees....oh yes, they have AIA by their name, yet they are way under me...hehe
the AIA is not a union. I used to belong to two IATSE locals when I was working in Hollywood. the differences between them is night and day. No, the AIA is NOT a union (but sometimes I wish it was). Once, the AIA colluded to set minimum fees, but the justice department defanged the association into the modern lobbying organization that it now is.
NAAB doesn't propose that new programs start, they just set the minimums for the curriculum to ensure a standard of competency of the graduates. if there are too many graduates, you can only blame the universities and all the wannabe architecture students clamoring to get into the profession for that, not the NAAB.
NCARB is supposed to be the gatekeeper to ensure that only folks with a minimum level of experience (read competency) get to take the exams through the administration of IDP. NCARB and IDP have both helped and hurt the profession. They helped by establishing national standards to enable easy reciprocity and licensure in other state. They hurt the profession by having such a narrow eye of the needle for what sorts of experience are required to meet their standard (if you deviate from being a generalist intern for those three+ years, you're screwed). But then, NCARB doesn't answer to us architects, it answers to the state architecture boards who must ensure the health, safety and welfare of their citizens.
the answer to the riddle depends on the person.
For oe the answer is none, they will be offended no matter what.
Dogshit? Wow really persuasive, eloquent critical thinking skills you've developed there oe.
I think when I was in the 5th grade this was the level of rebuttal that got respect on the playground. And most of those kids who traded blows over such words are in jail now.
I know, dogshit really is an immature rebuttal
like calling people morons or retards
Well, no marmkid. Moron and retard are words in the dictionary that I feel I can logically connect to the ideas as expressed by certain forum members at certain times.
Calling an idea or another forum member dogshit is definately moronic, retardiculous, and immature because how can dogshit get transmitted over the internet? As far as I know that capability has not been invented (yet at least).
However, moronic propositions (ideas) are in transmitted in abundance.
well yes actually
there are many words in the dictionary, Piggy
That doesnt make the use of them in this discussion mature by any means, and certainly not in the way you used them
no need to respond any further please, i only posted to click off the notification box so i can stop getting email updates for this thread which lost any useful discussion early on unfortunately
I'm glad. Perhaps you've finally learned the meaning and application behind the nursery rhymes I learned in my youth:
I'm rubber, you are glue
Everything you say, bounces off me
And sticks on you
Sticks and Stones
May Hurt my bones
But words will never hurt me
It seems that most people these days either forgot this rhyme and its meaning or have forgotten that in enlightened societies it a choice to receive offense and its esp. self destructive to look for receiving offense and choose to give it place to fester.
Ultimately it is your choice to read what I have to say, interpret what I have to say in what manner you choose, and to react (or not) however you ultimately choose. I cannot force that, it is entirely up to you.
I would understand what the AIA was except I don't actually work or know anything. Mostly I just write racist things on the internet all day to conceal my crushing insecurities.
Nice To the idiot-mobile! seriously clever.
I'm not an AIA member by choice. I value my soul more than what they have to offer.
By the way where the whole "racist" thing is going is:
1. all fighting bad
2. all hate leads to fighting
3. any mention of race by a white person leads to hate
4. on the pain of banishment and pain of death, a white person must never mention the "forbidden" topic of race
5. in "fact", it doesn't even exist anymore (according to the "brainiacs" in academia)
6. loss of freedom and the possession of one's own identity and soul.
7. enter the state to step in and possess it
I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see where this equation deviates from common sense.
I wonder if you've ever unplugged from MTV long enough to have heard of this guy: Noel Ignatiev
"Noel Ignatiev is an American history professor at the Massachusetts College of Art best known for his call to "abolish" the white race, which he defines as "white privilege and race identity.":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev
He is one of the primary generators of the retardiculous notion that "race is a social construct"
I wonder that all the other races that still have at least some remnant of self respect and pride left would think if for example this entrenched professor would call to abolish the "Oriental" or "Negro" or "Mexican" race?
really this is just a carefully designed play on words designed to dupe idiots into redirecting their otherwise well intentioned resources into the contemporary multiCULTuralism cartel.
This is the crowd that is truly full of hateful, extermination loving racists.
Think about it...if you can...again, brains are definitely annoying sometimes but I promise it won't hurt too much.
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.