Oh yeah, another obvious PRO would be an accelerated path to getting my license. From what I understand without a license (grandfathering) it takes 8 years of experience before I can take the test. I have about 4-5 (not exactly sure, I worked on and off summers for a period of 5 yrs). Does this mean that the 3 years of working would allow me to get a license quicker than being in school?? This doesn't seem right

If anyone has any experience in the grandfathering process please enlighten me. I heard they may be getting rid of this method of obtaining a license

"In the end, though, my real talent is business and can see myself getting into real estate and other investments..."

Listen to what your gut is telling you, and try to understand your motives as clearly as possible before you act.

Being a business manager at a large firm doesn't necessarily take an M.Arch.

Why do you have your heart set on getting your license? Is it because you love designing buildings or are you looking at it as a strategic career move, both, neither?

What role does the fact that your family is in the business play? Do you feel pressure, like your missing out?

Architecture takes a long time to learn. If some young stockbroker can be at the top of his game at 27, most good architects don’t hit their stride until much later in life. The type of thinking that makes architecture and design so rewarding is something that comes with time, and grows as your life changes.

Good luck sir.

Thanks for your response.

"Being a business manager at a large firm doesn't necessarily take an M.Arch. "

my goal is to become not a business manager but a manager of an architectural team, one that takes the project from schematics into construction. That said, I feel comfortable in all areas except the schematic design of the building, which is where the M.Arch would come in, I assume.

"Why do you have your heart set on getting your license? Is it because you love designing buildings or are you looking at it as a strategic career move, both, neither?"

I do love designing buildings and want to put myself in the best position (skill-wise) to do so. At this point in my career, who knows where I will fall into place on the spectrum of architecture. I am definitely less "technical" and more on the design side, from what people tell me at least. I think management of a project and team is where I will shine, when given an opportunity to do so.

anyway, the reason I have my heart set on getting a license is that If I were to become a manager (or ultimately, an associate/principal in the firm) a license is a part of the job description. there are no associates without licenses. It would also be vital to client credibility, from what I hear. Id like to have the option to use my license in other ventures (development, etc) if I were to choose to do so. The answer is both.

"What role does the fact that your family is in the business play? Do you feel pressure, like your missing out?"

My family is very open minded to whatever i do. Id say there is some pressure inside of me, but in the end it is my decision to make. I think i'm over stressing this school decision, although it really has helped to write out my thoughts on this forum. Thanks, and please come at me with more insight!

I think you missed the point that with an MArch the clock to three years starts after your first year of graduate school. So assuming you will take advantage of your education, it would be six years before you could get your license, versus four more years of work. Plus, a fair portion of the first professional degree program would be required courses that duplicate parts of your professional experience.

I think you do have educational goals that are quite reasonable, and I am certainly an advocate of education. So what about non-professional degree programs? There are a variety of MFA and MDES programs that you could craft into a chance to learn a lot about schematic design. Also, as I read the rules, they would count as experience under IDP, so they might well count under the broad experience rule (I'd ask the relevant official to be sure however).

If I count right, I just saved you two years and $200k :)

Finally, let me add the suggestion that you will get the most out of your education if you use it as an opportunity to expand your horizons. If I were in your position, I'd consider a degree abroad. Frankly, I think you could get a lot more affordable and reputable of an educational opportunity with the kind of experience you describe, and that will only be more true with more experience.

so howd you get into a designer position with your business background? Do you work for your families firm?
If I was in your situation I think i'd skip out on the MArch, unless you feel that you will really gain something out of it that you are looking for, it would be a waste of money unless you are dead set on being licensed. You are in a good position right now and are lucky to have a family supporting it. I would keep working but that is just my opinion. you have to search your own heart for what you truly want. good luck

will the staff in your future office, or at your family office, take orders from you and accept you are in charge if you don't have license and didn't go to school? if so then why not get your family to put you on schematic design and then on drafting details for about 4 years and then a few years of construction over-site? Basically follow the path of a recent graduate minus the education. you will end up in the same place if you are serious about it.

on other hand if you want more options then i would go to school and work in office and get the license the standard way.

it depends on what you want to do. school will teach you to think perhaps but will not teach you how to actually practice architecture. that is not what school is for. if you figure you can work that out for yourself (it isn't easy) and don't mind the hit from not having gone through the standard process then save yourself the money and learn on the job.

if it were me i would go to school for the intangibles that are on offer, that will make you a better architect. but that is my bias.

either way it seems like you are in a very good place. so many folks out there probably would love to switch places.

Yes, I work for my families firm but am not at a level where anybody would "take orders" from me in the slightest. Im a designer 2. In the future, I believe that yes I would absolutely have the same level of acceptance as someone with formal training...i've started out at the bottom (think makin copies and moving boxes, not that anyone should feel sorry for me :) ) and dont expect to be treated differently than anyone else in regard to promotions, respect, etc. This is something I value very highly. A license would be more valuable to me outside the practice (clients, etc) than inside, although it does hold weight to me in both regards.

It is a mid-sized (25 architects) firm, so the opportunity for me (or anyone else for that matter) to work in different areas of their choice, is out there. I think getting exposure to the areas you mentioned is a good idea, and is basically how I have been working. I have been lucky enough to be involved in 4 or 5 projects in the schematics phase in my 2 years working full time for the firm.

One thing i'm still confused about is the issue of licensing...NCARB says with a HS diploma you need 8 years work experience, and with a degree from an accredited program you need 3.5 years. If I have approx 4 years, all well documented, (although not through the IDP it should be), shouldnt I need 4 more years of work left to be able to take the licensing test? With school, id be able to take the test immediately after completion, correct?

Thank you all for your input, gotta love the forums

It still seems to me like you are kind of caught up with the titles of the positions you would some day like to achieve.

So much of your education is intangible. Its these small, seemingly insignificant things that have the biggest impact on you as a person and a designer.

I think you are doing yourself an injustice by looking at getting an M.Arch as simply a means to a specific end. If you're too focused on the bottom line (holding x position by age x) than you will subconsciously exclude most everything that doesn't get you closer to that goal.

"life is what happens when your busy making other plans" John Lennon.

I do think you should absolutely go for the M.Arch, but do it in more of a "lets-see-what-happens" kind of way.

I'd think about attending a summer intro intensive. I went to RISD for a summer prior to starting my undergrad (which was architecture, as was grad, but that was me and you are starting off with what I missed - business experience).

This would give you a great exposure to design. I found my 2 months there to be more educational than many semesters (superb instructor).


I'd think about what you want:

- Architecture...?
- Run a business?
- RE and RE Investments?
- RE Development?

If you don't want to design, then skip the MArch and focus on business. It sounds like that's your calling and architecture just happens to be the business that is in front of you. That's fine, think about what you want, what makes "business" interesting to you.

There are many opportunities in RE, from architecture to development to management. Figure out if:

1 - will you be able to take over your family firm? If so, and if you want that, then I'd get the MArch out of the way for your credentials. If they'll hand it off to you, then you are all set and have what most would only dream of.

2 - will you want to pursue business, but with an architectural approach? Then I'd figure out if you want business more than architecture, in which case you'd be hiring architects, making you a boss without any degrees (like re development)


Personally, I'd take advantage of what you have in front of you. A successful family business that you can quickly learn/earn to the top is a great and fortunate start. I'd probably get a dual masters (yup, this is always my answer!) - MArch/MSRED. That'd expand your business knowledge into re specific areas and give you a MArch.
You'd have unlimited possibilities with that.


Good luck. Take advantage and appreciate what you have there.


Lastly, as ihb noted, don't worry about a checklist and time table. Licensure isn't anything you need unless you are only doing architecture. If you are doing your investments and possibly development, it'd be better if you didn't have one.

I would seek the opinion of your family connected in architecture above all else. If you plan on working with them, they are the best ones to give you perspective on how obtaining an M.Arch might help with the family business. If you don't plan to work with them, at least they know your situation better than anyone on this message board and have good practical advice from the architecture side as well.

Personally, I think if you feel limited by not having one in the next couple of years, then I'd go for the M.Arch. If you are business savvy, grow that skill for a couple more years and see where it takes you. If the M.arch is still haunting you, go for it.

Have you started your CIPD? it also falls under the newly minted 6 month rule....so you may be at 0 years toward your license right now anyway. Personally, having gone through the trenches of years in an office and a professional degree after college AND the tests, I would find it difficult to trust the expertise of a person NOT holding degrees or else MANY years of experience. That may be an issue if you do in fact come into a position of authority....you may not be able to keep good talent. An MDESS, MSArch or other such degree would not even be possible. You need a professional degree to be eligible for them (at least Harvard's...I am not even aware of others). A BFA would put you at the level of ID...this is an ART degree. So again, I am not sure many architects would be comfortable trusting your leadership....especially when it came to code issues, material issues, detail issues, etc. Passing the ARE's does not REALLY make you an architect. Although school does not either, it is staggering how much less "designers" who do not hold professional degrees tend to know. The business is important, but the legal side is equally important. Design is subjective, so I will not really get into that....but I also have to say the maturity level of an uneducated designer can get him or her into trouble too.

My advice is to first check and start your CIPD record. That will tell you if you have any eligible experience. My guess is that you don't if you have not started it. Then, the decision is a little clearer.

PS....credit with clients is also an issue as you mentioned earlier. Not many clients want an "architect" who is not a licensed architect. You would not be able to legally advertise yourself as an architect either (along with impersonating a doctor, it has recently been made a full felony, which it rightfully should be). So long story short, if you want to be taken seriously as an ARCHITECT, you should probably go to school. If you want to be a developer, all you really need is money and a willingness to mistreat others.


Good luck.