Sparked by recent forum activity, namely the latest thread about what an entry level architect should be called and what they should be doing, I thought we should talk about paraprofessionals in architecture, or perhaps the lack thereof.
Architects used to employ paraprofessionals, they had titles like drafters and technicians. Why is the idea of having paraprofessionals so threatening to architects?
"But when we use emerging professionals to manage the ebb and flow of the construction cycle, we also risk eliminating the future leaders of firms, as well as the future leaders of the profession, in hard times. To this day, the profession has not fully recovered from the early 1990s construction downturn, which forced a lot of younger architectural staff out of the profession, never to return."
Enjoy.
curtkram
Aug 12, 14 3:53 pm
that wasn't really directed at anyone in particular archanonymous
to rephrase, architects are licensed to protect public health and safety. if a private residence were to fall down because the homeowner did some shoddy roof job, it wouldn't be "the public" at risk, but rather just a single private homeowner on their private property.
residential work is less restricted because of the scope of those affected and limits of government and all that.
Non Sequitur
Aug 12, 14 4:08 pm
Curtkram, where I work, any home owner can walk into the building permit office and receive a permit for a reno or addition without a p.eng or architect's stamp often with nothing more than a convincing interpretive dance and a promise that the drawings (and responsibilities) are their own. But, if they ask their CAD savvy 12-year old neighbour's son to draft up a plan, then that kid better show a professional stamp if the docs have any hint that whom-ever was drafting them could be doing so professionally. I would be interested to know how common this attitude is.
This means than many "by owner" applications are deliberately bad so that it owners pass off the drawings as their own. However, this only applies to residential... once you get into multi-unit housing or commercial buildings, a professional stamp is obviously needed.
I've gotten a decent amount of free liquor helping friends and family navigate the permit process by themselves this way while I was still a student and unlicensed.
curtkram
Aug 12, 14 4:17 pm
i think in my area, a homeowner can do their own work like you're saying, up to a limit. enough electrical work, like a new panel, or building a fence too tall requires extra hoops to jump through
if you hire a contractor to do the work, then the contractor has to be licensed and probably insured. i think the relation to your scenario is that the 12 year old would be perceived as a contractor rather than the owner, and scope a set of regulations regarding them being a contractor. in those cases, it's my understanding that the contractor can submit, and doesn't need an architect or engineer
architects or engineers are required in certain cases for 'unconventional construction'
x-jla
Aug 12, 14 6:06 pm
Non sequitur, that is very uncommon. You must be in NY? In almost every state (like 47/50) one can design sfr without a license professionally. There are a few firms that I know of that do really high quality high end residential...rammed earth walls all that stuff. They all have experience but no licenses. When unconventional they have to get an engineer to review and stamp but so do architects. You can essentially be a residential architect without a license in mostnplaces. Just can't call yourself one which is dumb. Most commercial and multifamily needs architect. I think even duplexes require a stamp, but some states allow up to 4 units...only state that requires an architect for all sfr is ny...but what do you expect from Ny where you need a license to be a florist...no joke.
x-jla
Aug 12, 14 6:22 pm
Only about 3% of houses are designed by licensed architects. Probably about 3% by unlicensed architects...about 35% are stock plans off Internet...the rest by contractors and developers that either do the design themselves or hire some drafter off Craigslist.
archanonymous
Aug 12, 14 9:10 pm
Does anyone have experience in different countries with different professional licensure models and want to comment on the differences?
kaylynn
Sep 1, 16 9:55 pm
Hi, I am a senior in high school and I am planning on pursueing architecture. I do not know if I should get a bachelors in Architecture(5 year degree) aka professional degree or just a bachelors of science in architecture (pre-professional) 4 year degree. I do not want to be a liscensed arch. Will I get a job with a pre-professional 4 year degree? Can I design custom homes for people working under a lisenced arch. being pre-profesional? Is the five year degree just for people who are going to be lisenced? Thank you!! I hope I get an answer soon!! This will literally determine my future!!
Non Sequitur
Sep 1, 16 10:02 pm
Accredited degree should be your only choice.
Wilma Buttfit
Sep 1, 16 11:04 pm
Update: since this thread first started, I've been working in architecture again and now taking the ARE. I must be crazy, but Cheers!
shellarchitect
Sep 1, 16 11:21 pm
Nothing really wrong with 4+ 2 other than the expense. Some schools let you out when a master's in 5 yrs if you stay there the whole time. Ltu and udm both offer that option, no idea who else might.
AdrianFGA
Sep 2, 16 4:49 pm
I would take that a step further...part of the reason why architecture has become so marginalized is the lack of specialization. We should have more defined specialties. I hate the analogy to doctors and lawyers
There is an analogy closer to home than doctors or lawyers - engineering, which is so specialised and has so many branches and sub-branches - civil, electrical, mechanical, software, to name a few. Pending their choices, engineering students take different courses right from university or poly. An electrical engineer will not seal structural drawings, or vice versa.
Sparked by recent forum activity, namely the latest thread about what an entry level architect should be called and what they should be doing, I thought we should talk about paraprofessionals in architecture, or perhaps the lack thereof.
Architects used to employ paraprofessionals, they had titles like drafters and technicians. Why is the idea of having paraprofessionals so threatening to architects?
Architect magazine article: The Case for Paraprofessionals
"But when we use emerging professionals to manage the ebb and flow of the construction cycle, we also risk eliminating the future leaders of firms, as well as the future leaders of the profession, in hard times. To this day, the profession has not fully recovered from the early 1990s construction downturn, which forced a lot of younger architectural staff out of the profession, never to return."
Enjoy.
that wasn't really directed at anyone in particular archanonymous
to rephrase, architects are licensed to protect public health and safety. if a private residence were to fall down because the homeowner did some shoddy roof job, it wouldn't be "the public" at risk, but rather just a single private homeowner on their private property.
residential work is less restricted because of the scope of those affected and limits of government and all that.
Curtkram, where I work, any home owner can walk into the building permit office and receive a permit for a reno or addition without a p.eng or architect's stamp often with nothing more than a convincing interpretive dance and a promise that the drawings (and responsibilities) are their own. But, if they ask their CAD savvy 12-year old neighbour's son to draft up a plan, then that kid better show a professional stamp if the docs have any hint that whom-ever was drafting them could be doing so professionally. I would be interested to know how common this attitude is.
This means than many "by owner" applications are deliberately bad so that it owners pass off the drawings as their own. However, this only applies to residential... once you get into multi-unit housing or commercial buildings, a professional stamp is obviously needed.
I've gotten a decent amount of free liquor helping friends and family navigate the permit process by themselves this way while I was still a student and unlicensed.
i think in my area, a homeowner can do their own work like you're saying, up to a limit. enough electrical work, like a new panel, or building a fence too tall requires extra hoops to jump through
if you hire a contractor to do the work, then the contractor has to be licensed and probably insured. i think the relation to your scenario is that the 12 year old would be perceived as a contractor rather than the owner, and scope a set of regulations regarding them being a contractor. in those cases, it's my understanding that the contractor can submit, and doesn't need an architect or engineer
architects or engineers are required in certain cases for 'unconventional construction'
Non sequitur, that is very uncommon. You must be in NY? In almost every state (like 47/50) one can design sfr without a license professionally. There are a few firms that I know of that do really high quality high end residential...rammed earth walls all that stuff. They all have experience but no licenses. When unconventional they have to get an engineer to review and stamp but so do architects. You can essentially be a residential architect without a license in mostnplaces. Just can't call yourself one which is dumb. Most commercial and multifamily needs architect. I think even duplexes require a stamp, but some states allow up to 4 units...only state that requires an architect for all sfr is ny...but what do you expect from Ny where you need a license to be a florist...no joke.
Only about 3% of houses are designed by licensed architects. Probably about 3% by unlicensed architects...about 35% are stock plans off Internet...the rest by contractors and developers that either do the design themselves or hire some drafter off Craigslist.
Does anyone have experience in different countries with different professional licensure models and want to comment on the differences?
Hi, I am a senior in high school and I am planning on pursueing architecture. I do not know if I should get a bachelors in Architecture(5 year degree) aka professional degree or just a bachelors of science in architecture (pre-professional) 4 year degree. I do not want to be a liscensed arch. Will I get a job with a pre-professional 4 year degree? Can I design custom homes for people working under a lisenced arch. being pre-profesional? Is the five year degree just for people who are going to be lisenced? Thank you!! I hope I get an answer soon!! This will literally determine my future!!
Accredited degree should be your only choice.
Update: since this thread first started, I've been working in architecture again and now taking the ARE. I must be crazy, but Cheers!
Nothing really wrong with 4+ 2 other than the expense. Some schools let you out when a master's in 5 yrs if you stay there the whole time. Ltu and udm both offer that option, no idea who else might.
I would take that a step further...part of the reason why architecture has become so marginalized is the lack of specialization. We should have more defined specialties. I hate the analogy to doctors and lawyers
There is an analogy closer to home than doctors or lawyers - engineering, which is so specialised and has so many branches and sub-branches - civil, electrical, mechanical, software, to name a few. Pending their choices, engineering students take different courses right from university or poly. An electrical engineer will not seal structural drawings, or vice versa.