It doesn't say that they are removing ARE requirement just that the portfolio can be used in leau of AXP aka IDP which is a great idea imo.
ivorykeyboard
Mar 18, 16 12:45 am
Slippery slope, but the AREs are garbage- maybe 5.0 will be an improvement
Wilma Buttfit
Mar 18, 16 7:30 am
Wow, thanks for posting. Good to know. Edit: not so fast, it is in lieu of IDP (AXP) not the ARE. Not goodbye ARE's
shellarchitect
Mar 18, 16 8:43 am
really annoyed that getting licensed seems to be getting much easier now that i'm finally licensed!
(idp took forever)
BulgarBlogger
Mar 18, 16 8:46 am
+ 1 Shuemi
It seems like all the people who were not getting their license were getting jealous and rose up to NCARB and complained how complicated the process is when in fact they are just lazy....
null pointer
Mar 18, 16 9:31 am
I basically had no social life for almost a year while taking the AREs.
This is fucking bullshit.
shellarchitect
Mar 18, 16 9:54 am
seems like i read quite awhile ago that ncarb was worried about people not getting licensed (back in 2010ish) So they've been steadily making it easier, yet the reason for the decline had way more to do with the economy than anything else.
That being said, I've said many times that IDP is a terrible system since it puts the licensing process out of your control
archanonymous
Mar 18, 16 10:40 am
As pointed out, this replaces IDP, NOT the ARE.
That said, there is a good chance many of the states will keep their various other requirements in place (or I hope they do) rendering this moot for most people who want to practice widely.
Just like your Colorado-based license that you got with a 4-year bachelor degree doesn't get you reciprocity in California, I expect this to be resisted at a more local level.
the ARE isn't great at what it is supposed to do and IDP could be better/ more rigorous. I don't think making the process easier is the answer, though. Better, not easier.
x-jla
Mar 18, 16 12:13 pm
New rule, you cannot complain about lack of diversity while supporting the mechanism that contributes to it.
shellarchitect
Mar 18, 16 12:19 pm
just curious - how the the are/idp/xdp affect diversity?
x-jla
Mar 18, 16 1:06 pm
The ARE dosent at all. I'm all for keeping the tests in place. IDP on the other hand puts grads at the mercy of employers and restricts them from working outside of conventional practice. This effects diversity in 2 main ways. First is the diversity in the actual demographics. For those with the financial and personal freedom to move around for internships that often last for months at a time it's not a big deal...for the woman with 3 kids who got pigeon holed at work and cannot fulfill the various categories of IDP but needs the job...The current system dosent prevent people without financial freedom from entering, but it certainly favors those with it. If the system to enter is set up to favor a certain demographic then you shouldn't be surprised when the practice reflects that. Second is the diversity of practice itself. Under the current system there is a narrow and finite type of practice that is required to satisfy the categories of AXP which is limiting to people who decideded to work in unconventional areas.
StarchitectAlpha
Mar 18, 16 1:32 pm
I 100% agree with Jla-X. The lack of diversity is a direct result of who can afford to stick out the process of not making money. The people who have stuck with the profession from my program tend to be those whose parents gave them a down payment for their first condo with no student debt.
StarchitectAlpha
Mar 18, 16 1:36 pm
Saying that though, the obvious fix is make it 10x harder. It's a supply issue.
won and done williams
Mar 18, 16 1:37 pm
Not sure it affects "diversity" per se, but I do think the ARE is virtually impossible for a working parent to complete. Between taking care of kids and a 40+ hour work week, there just aren't hours in the day to study for 7 exams. I advise all 20-somethings I know to get them out of the way now before life takes over.
SneakyPete
Mar 18, 16 2:11 pm
Study Shmuddy. While reading the study materials helps by putting the ARE-unique idiocy in once place, the majority of the info I have needed to pass has been gained on the job.
I'm not discounting the likelihood that this is not true for everyone, and I would never suggest that ARE + Parenthood is anything less than a feat of strength I would not want to attempt.
x-jla
Mar 18, 16 2:24 pm
IDP is extremely difficult for any parent that relies on a steady income. Most grads I know jumped between 4-5 internships, often in various states, before completing IDP. How can anyone with kids, student debts, and other financial obligations pull that off? So are we filtering the out the dummies or those with the most life constraints? Especially during times of recession. IDP is an awkward and stupid mixture or state mandates, National standards via NCARB, and private businesses. we need to get rid of it or at least create an alternate path like the one being proposed.
Fivescore
Mar 18, 16 3:19 pm
You have to have a minimum of two full years of experience that's more than 5 years old. It's a good option for those with various life constraints, but I'd hope most new grads wouldn't make it their plan to wait 7+ years minimum before being cleared to start testing.
Mar 18, 16 3:31 pm
This alternative path is temporary from what I understand. I believe it is for people who have two YEARS or more of such experience (to not have to take IDP) PRIOR to June 30th or July 1st 2016. People with less than two years that is over 5 years old may possibly have those hours count under the additional hours beyond the core. As for the core hours, I am not sure. The experience would need to occur prior to July 2016 from my understanding.
In other words, this path would not be available for new interns or new experiences obtained after July 2016. I assume July 1, 2016. This means interns can't just use this path.... wait 7 years and then apply it.
It doesn't replace IDP/AXP or an alternative. It's more like a one time option for people with qualifiable experience to get the experience and then be allowed in. After that, they are S.O.L.
Mar 18, 16 3:35 pm
Threesleve,
Experience would have to been earned prior to July 1, 2016 or some designated date. So, it will effectively sunset.
It isn't nor does it look like something designed as a permanent rule from my understanding.
How it seems to be described is this is targetted for experienced earned prior to July 2011. I think there would be a terminal point on this path.
makingspace
Mar 18, 16 3:56 pm
Even someone who has a family can become licensed. There is more than one office in whatever city such a person lives in. They can change jobs. No one is completely bound to one office, no matter how comfortable they feel there. We are each in charge of our own careers.
We are allowed plenty of time between each exam and if someone studies while they can, being disciplined, it can be done.
How many alternatives do people need to be licensed? The license is for a specific type of practice of architecture that has been evolving for almost a century.
If you want to do some community development thing or make houses out of rubber tires you're not falling within the established system. Unless of course you'd rather squeeze yourself into the established process?
Whatever happened to people being disciplined and pushing themselves to reaching a goal? If there are institutional barriers then let's smash them.
x-jla
Mar 18, 16 4:52 pm
Yes, and a person from poverty can become successful too, but statistically you have a lower chance, which is why successful people are overwhelmingly not from poverty.
proto
Mar 18, 16 4:58 pm
i'm not sure how much easier a process the ARE could be currently. i know i was excited to not have to do the old long process test...
#kidsthesedays #getoffmylawn
x-jla
Mar 18, 16 6:58 pm
^ no one is talking about the ARE...but by the looks of it they should test for reading comprehension.
Fivescore
Mar 19, 16 4:00 pm
It's not intended to be a temporary thing. Rick you're misunderstanding. The reason the dates are mentioned is to contrast the current rules for accepting old experience for partial IDP credit, with the new rules in which 2 years of full time experience more than 5 years old will give one the choice of doing the portfolio review instead of IDP. It's intended to fix the problem of people who have to drop out of the full time work force for a period of time due to life circumstances and then finding that they've lost credit for their past experience and have to effectively start IDP over, or mostly over.
Mar 19, 16 5:14 pm
You know, I'll agree that I could be misunderstanding this. NCARB isn't helping much from what I read of it. I understand this is really designed for those who began their career in pre-IDP 2.0 era.
IDP 2.0 era opened up many opportunities for candidates to submit all sorts of training hours.
From my understanding is IDP record would be retained in database records and paper records for essentially forever. NCARB record and past IDP is forever if its submitted. Only reason people lost hours was because they didn't get on the bandwagon of reporting those hours within 6 months of when the 6 month rule was enacted. If they submitted their hours and all that, it would be there forever even if they hadn't paid their NCARB renewals so they just pay the fees and record reactivated.
This would help THOSE people.
I'll have to look at this as this materializes in better detail. I am not sure how anyone would be ready to take experience that would qualify under the ePortfolio program that wouldn't have been counted as qualifying IDP experience and that people submit their hours within a week or two after earning them or within a week or two after termination of employment.
You submit them and you get those employers to review those hours and if they are accurate and good, then be approved. Past employers isn't going to entertain reviewing past employees hours for two much time after that employee's employment is terminated. It should be reviewed as soon after the last day of work not 6 months or 2 years later. They just won't bother with it. They look at it like this: "if that past employee was too f---ing lazy to contact me within a week or two after termination of employment, why should I waste my time with that asshole. That asshole can go f--- himself/herself."
In this day and age, you have to be proactive about it and be prompt about it.
This ePortfolio does sound interesting. I'll have to read up more on it. What is accepted and so forth. If it somehow can be applicable to me in the future (or even if not).... it would be good to learn about.
What the shit? So should I stop taking tests and submit my portfolio?
http://www.ncarb.org/News-and-Events/News/2016/Mar-ePortfolio.aspx
Maybe... maybe not.
This is great news.
It doesn't say that they are removing ARE requirement just that the portfolio can be used in leau of AXP aka IDP which is a great idea imo.
Slippery slope, but the AREs are garbage- maybe 5.0 will be an improvement
Wow, thanks for posting. Good to know. Edit: not so fast, it is in lieu of IDP (AXP) not the ARE. Not goodbye ARE's
really annoyed that getting licensed seems to be getting much easier now that i'm finally licensed!
(idp took forever)
+ 1 Shuemi
It seems like all the people who were not getting their license were getting jealous and rose up to NCARB and complained how complicated the process is when in fact they are just lazy....
I basically had no social life for almost a year while taking the AREs.
This is fucking bullshit.
seems like i read quite awhile ago that ncarb was worried about people not getting licensed (back in 2010ish) So they've been steadily making it easier, yet the reason for the decline had way more to do with the economy than anything else.
That being said, I've said many times that IDP is a terrible system since it puts the licensing process out of your control
As pointed out, this replaces IDP, NOT the ARE.
That said, there is a good chance many of the states will keep their various other requirements in place (or I hope they do) rendering this moot for most people who want to practice widely.
Just like your Colorado-based license that you got with a 4-year bachelor degree doesn't get you reciprocity in California, I expect this to be resisted at a more local level.
the ARE isn't great at what it is supposed to do and IDP could be better/ more rigorous. I don't think making the process easier is the answer, though. Better, not easier.
New rule, you cannot complain about lack of diversity while supporting the mechanism that contributes to it.
just curious - how the the are/idp/xdp affect diversity?
The ARE dosent at all. I'm all for keeping the tests in place. IDP on the other hand puts grads at the mercy of employers and restricts them from working outside of conventional practice. This effects diversity in 2 main ways. First is the diversity in the actual demographics. For those with the financial and personal freedom to move around for internships that often last for months at a time it's not a big deal...for the woman with 3 kids who got pigeon holed at work and cannot fulfill the various categories of IDP but needs the job...The current system dosent prevent people without financial freedom from entering, but it certainly favors those with it. If the system to enter is set up to favor a certain demographic then you shouldn't be surprised when the practice reflects that. Second is the diversity of practice itself. Under the current system there is a narrow and finite type of practice that is required to satisfy the categories of AXP which is limiting to people who decideded to work in unconventional areas.
I 100% agree with Jla-X. The lack of diversity is a direct result of who can afford to stick out the process of not making money. The people who have stuck with the profession from my program tend to be those whose parents gave them a down payment for their first condo with no student debt.
Saying that though, the obvious fix is make it 10x harder. It's a supply issue.
Not sure it affects "diversity" per se, but I do think the ARE is virtually impossible for a working parent to complete. Between taking care of kids and a 40+ hour work week, there just aren't hours in the day to study for 7 exams. I advise all 20-somethings I know to get them out of the way now before life takes over.
Study Shmuddy. While reading the study materials helps by putting the ARE-unique idiocy in once place, the majority of the info I have needed to pass has been gained on the job.
I'm not discounting the likelihood that this is not true for everyone, and I would never suggest that ARE + Parenthood is anything less than a feat of strength I would not want to attempt.
IDP is extremely difficult for any parent that relies on a steady income. Most grads I know jumped between 4-5 internships, often in various states, before completing IDP. How can anyone with kids, student debts, and other financial obligations pull that off? So are we filtering the out the dummies or those with the most life constraints? Especially during times of recession. IDP is an awkward and stupid mixture or state mandates, National standards via NCARB, and private businesses. we need to get rid of it or at least create an alternate path like the one being proposed.
You have to have a minimum of two full years of experience that's more than 5 years old. It's a good option for those with various life constraints, but I'd hope most new grads wouldn't make it their plan to wait 7+ years minimum before being cleared to start testing.
This alternative path is temporary from what I understand. I believe it is for people who have two YEARS or more of such experience (to not have to take IDP) PRIOR to June 30th or July 1st 2016. People with less than two years that is over 5 years old may possibly have those hours count under the additional hours beyond the core. As for the core hours, I am not sure. The experience would need to occur prior to July 2016 from my understanding.
In other words, this path would not be available for new interns or new experiences obtained after July 2016. I assume July 1, 2016. This means interns can't just use this path.... wait 7 years and then apply it.
It doesn't replace IDP/AXP or an alternative. It's more like a one time option for people with qualifiable experience to get the experience and then be allowed in. After that, they are S.O.L.
Threesleve,
Experience would have to been earned prior to July 1, 2016 or some designated date. So, it will effectively sunset.
It isn't nor does it look like something designed as a permanent rule from my understanding.
How it seems to be described is this is targetted for experienced earned prior to July 2011. I think there would be a terminal point on this path.
Even someone who has a family can become licensed. There is more than one office in whatever city such a person lives in. They can change jobs. No one is completely bound to one office, no matter how comfortable they feel there. We are each in charge of our own careers.
We are allowed plenty of time between each exam and if someone studies while they can, being disciplined, it can be done.
How many alternatives do people need to be licensed? The license is for a specific type of practice of architecture that has been evolving for almost a century.
If you want to do some community development thing or make houses out of rubber tires you're not falling within the established system. Unless of course you'd rather squeeze yourself into the established process?
Whatever happened to people being disciplined and pushing themselves to reaching a goal? If there are institutional barriers then let's smash them.
Yes, and a person from poverty can become successful too, but statistically you have a lower chance, which is why successful people are overwhelmingly not from poverty.
i'm not sure how much easier a process the ARE could be currently. i know i was excited to not have to do the old long process test...
#kidsthesedays #getoffmylawn
^ no one is talking about the ARE...but by the looks of it they should test for reading comprehension.
It's not intended to be a temporary thing. Rick you're misunderstanding. The reason the dates are mentioned is to contrast the current rules for accepting old experience for partial IDP credit, with the new rules in which 2 years of full time experience more than 5 years old will give one the choice of doing the portfolio review instead of IDP. It's intended to fix the problem of people who have to drop out of the full time work force for a period of time due to life circumstances and then finding that they've lost credit for their past experience and have to effectively start IDP over, or mostly over.
You know, I'll agree that I could be misunderstanding this. NCARB isn't helping much from what I read of it. I understand this is really designed for those who began their career in pre-IDP 2.0 era.
IDP 2.0 era opened up many opportunities for candidates to submit all sorts of training hours.
From my understanding is IDP record would be retained in database records and paper records for essentially forever. NCARB record and past IDP is forever if its submitted. Only reason people lost hours was because they didn't get on the bandwagon of reporting those hours within 6 months of when the 6 month rule was enacted. If they submitted their hours and all that, it would be there forever even if they hadn't paid their NCARB renewals so they just pay the fees and record reactivated.
This would help THOSE people.
I'll have to look at this as this materializes in better detail. I am not sure how anyone would be ready to take experience that would qualify under the ePortfolio program that wouldn't have been counted as qualifying IDP experience and that people submit their hours within a week or two after earning them or within a week or two after termination of employment.
You submit them and you get those employers to review those hours and if they are accurate and good, then be approved. Past employers isn't going to entertain reviewing past employees hours for two much time after that employee's employment is terminated. It should be reviewed as soon after the last day of work not 6 months or 2 years later. They just won't bother with it. They look at it like this: "if that past employee was too f---ing lazy to contact me within a week or two after termination of employment, why should I waste my time with that asshole. That asshole can go f--- himself/herself."
In this day and age, you have to be proactive about it and be prompt about it.
This ePortfolio does sound interesting. I'll have to read up more on it. What is accepted and so forth. If it somehow can be applicable to me in the future (or even if not).... it would be good to learn about.