I don't see anything wrong with it, unless you want to be licensed.

of course I want to be licensed! lol
Im just still not ready to study like I did in college yet.
But I wonder if I wait too long will I even care anymore, after lets say 5-10years.

Another factor is that I am stressed beyond belief with my college loans and wouldnt be able to concentrate on studying

I would definitely start mentally preparing, pick a year, and go for it.

It seems like the well-settled guys who aren't licensed don't really care to do it anymore. There is only so much more you could earn and do with a license if your role is already well established in a particular firm. That's why many find it financially beneficial to get licensed young, get hired on somewhere else that really needs a new licensed architect, and see your value increase.

...Well, at least in the good ole days of 2008.

From an IDP standpoint, your timing in raising this question now probably could not be much worse: see IDP "6-month" Rule"

Personally, I don't much see the point of working hard in school, working hard at a job after completing school and then not sitting for the exam. I'm guessing when you're 50 or so, you'll wish you had done it as soon after graduation as allowed.

Good luck.

i waited about 5 years after graduation before starting to take the exams. once you get into it it's sort of a rush to get that 'pass' letter and i passed the 9 exams (back in the day) in a little over a year. then i took the california supplemental exam which was another year or so (about a 5 month wait for the first test date, failing the first one [loser!] then finally passing).

so yeah, if you do want to get licensed i found it was hard to take the first one but once you get into it it's easy to knock 'em out.

as many have suggested before, just schedule your first test about 6 weeks from now and it will force you to start studying.

You've got T minus 9 hours to categorize and log-in 4 years worth of timesheets into IDP. Unless you haven't established an NCARB record yet... In that case you've only got 6 months of eligible IDP credits max.

I still dont see the point of the 6 mth rule if i didnt start my IDP yet

I start IDP, I start my exams...I finish IDP in 3years...I finish exams in 3-4 years.

So what, I have almost 4years of experience under my belt that I havent logged

I don't think you are alone with this attitude. "What's the point" is something I hear a lot. My employer sure didn't give me a raise or promotion upon getting registered. There are a lot of firms out there that promote non-registered people to management positions. Honestly, I know CAD techs that have worked up to Senior Associate levels. Not getting into what I think of that, the fact of the matter is that you can make a very good career out of Architecture and never become an "Architect." (I cringe writing that, but it's the truth.)

Now, all that said, I didn't go to all the work to get the degree without ultimately getting registered. Waited about 5 years after graduating to finally take the exams. As mentioned, taking the first exam was the toughest, but after that it was easy to pound out all nine exams in about a years time.

yea, sounds like you've got it figured out. no use sweating the IDP if your jurisdiction lets you test concurrently.

wets: not really sure why you're posting this question. if you don't want to go through the process of licensure, don't. fine with us -- in this economy, the rest of us don't really need the competition.

However, if you do, then - from the standpoint of IDP alone - you've squandered nearly 4-years of applicable experience, meaning you've just pushed out the completion date by an unnecessary 3-years.

we're not going to motivate you ... you'll need to do that for yourself.

if there's any part of you that would regret not getting your license then you are better off starting right away, otherwise you're just delaying (and increasing) the pain. once you get past the first exam and in a routine it really does start rolling. that being said, it IS expensive.

I never asked for motivation from anyone, I just wanted some opinions from people outside my workplace and arch friends is all.

I also never said that I didnt want to take the exams...Im just at a point where I not really seeing a point to take the exams at this moment. And whated actually to hear from both sides...side 1 being Thom and comb - side B being aquapura

aquapura - Thanks for your thoughts

I'm on the get yer license side. You've obviously conquered challenges to get to where you are - why not just make a decision to focus on the ARE and finish it - I have heard of people taking all 7 sections in 3 months (which is insane).

Botton line is that you did the school, you did the internship, you should get your license. Then decide what you will do with it. I feel like all the whining about why NOT to be a RA on this board smells like justification for doing nothing.

Working hard and simply paying attention to your projects in the office are the best forms of studying for the exams, no matter how long you've been out of school.

"...7 sections in 3 months (which is insane)."

This statement, more than any other I have read on this site, convinces me that the current computer format exam, which you can sign up for one section at at time, is THE reason that so many people are delaying getting their license. It is just too easy to put if off now.

The norm used to be 9 sections in 4 days, with the 4th day being 12 hours long with no official breaks. You got one chance every 12 months to give it a try. That seemed to provide plenty of motivation...back in the day.

Respect Ledoux's Eye,

just one question did they try to confuse you with strange wording on the multiple choice back then? because i read the questions and it throws me off, then it takes a few seconds and i say " oh i understand what they are asking, why didn't they just ask it using plain english" followed by a cuss word in my mind. "fucking assholes".

I don't recall the multiple choice questions being any more (or less) tricky than most multiple choice tests. They were challenging, for sure. One of the sections in those days was a specific "history" exam. This was before they started folding history questions into other sections of the exam. That history exam was actually one of the most difficult sections (and I thought I was pretty sharp on architectural history). Many of the questions relied on looking at a very bad quality photocopied black & white photograph or drawing of a building and then answering a series of questions like what is it? Who did it? Where is it? What is the significance of it? Some were easy, but plenty were pretty obscure (for me, at least). Somehow, I passed.