Sorry. Completely agree with Donna's comment. It's one thing for a M.Arch to be a professional degree. D.Arch is a completely different animal.
Jun 20, 16 8:41 pm
I would find that these changes can subsequently cause students and graduates a shit storm with FAFSA. If your degree worked as an undergraduate and then becomes graduate credits, it'll become a problem because certain grant money can only be used for undergraduate studies not graduate level courses. This can also come back and haunt students for back due tuition because of different tuition rates. This can turn into a shit storm.
Maybe I don't understand the processes involved. I'll admit that I don't understand this.
Josh Mings
Jun 20, 16 8:59 pm
If you don't understand it, don't comment.
Donna Sink
Jun 20, 16 9:00 pm
Oh JFC.
Jun 20, 16 9:32 pm
I am just wondering what the retroactive shit storm that lawyers for FAFSA and/or the universities may cause the students and those who graduated with their degrees trying to get money back for credits that were undergraduate becoming graduate credits.
If for example Johnny got his B.Arch this year and next year, it's reclassified as an M.Arch, and so that 5 year B.Arch credits becomes graduate credits instead of undergraduate credits.
All that Pell Grant and other such grants would have to be repaid to FAFSA and the college may potentially go after that student for the difference in price per credit in tuition. That is a lot of money. So a person who thought their student loan was X amount in now Y amount. What was $13,000 a year for 5 years becomes $35,000 a year. From $65,000 becomes up to like $175,000.
This is what I hope would NOT happen.
Pell grants can only be used for undergraduates credits. If those credits are retroactively converted to graduate credits, oh boy, a shit storm would be brewing big time.
curtkram
Jun 20, 16 9:42 pm
this is absolutely ridiculous. i can't believe anyone would take this serious.
doctorate is for people practicing medicine, juris doctorates, and people who forget how to leave school. that does not describe the contribution i make to the world. i create the world, those other scrubs just practice in it. to share such a petty title with them is an insult.
at the very least i expect the title 'baron' with all associated lands and rights to be bestowed upon me forthwith.
curtkram
Jun 20, 16 9:43 pm
johnny would not have to repay his pell grant.
Jun 20, 16 10:08 pm
What if the credits no longer count as undergraduate credits and becomes graduate credits? You can't use pell grants or whatever grants that are for UNDERGRADUATE CREDITS only.
You can't use it for Graduate credits. Therefore those grant money amounts would have to be converted to federal student loans or otherwise be paid back.
The legal issues get ugly.
In my opinion, it's best to not convert students who are already enrolled in undergrad without a previous BA/BS degree) or those who already have their degree. It leads to a lot of problematic issues. The smoothest legal way would be to discontinue such a B.Arch degree through a phase out process and start a new 3-year M.Arch if institution don't have one. The phase out would be to continue undergrad courses for students already enrolled until they finish their degree and only be an option to students admitted & enrolled prior to the date of discontinuance. Then adjust academic requirements for grad students to meet graduate school academic requirements. That is how such suppose to be done. As for D.Archs, that would be additional courses meeting graduate school standards for doctoral studies beyond that of an M.Arch.
Accreditation would have to remain for such a phase out. Once phase out had been completed by students and they all graduated, the B.Arch accreditation would not have to be renewed. There's no short-cutting it in my opinion nor should there be.
curtkram
Jun 20, 16 10:12 pm
there's not takebacks in the pell grant. if you get the pell grant, you get to keep it. retroactively changing the status of your credits would not retroactively change the award.
Jun 20, 16 10:27 pm
curtkram,
Ok. If you can support that with some documented law or rule that explicitly governs Pell Grants that are current... that would be better. Just a kind request for a citation of source.
If I was in such position, I'd be pissed and rightly so.
Josh Mings
Jun 20, 16 11:08 pm
Hey Rick, you know what happened when Tulane changed their B.Arch to M.Arch a while back? People that got the B.Arch were retroactively awarded the M.Arch and they didn't owe a thing. No one took grants away or charged back owed raised tuition.
You're clueless.
Jun 20, 16 11:16 pm
I wasn't even aware of the Tulane thing changing their B.Arch to M.Arch. Thank You for a cited source. Maybe the institution did something about the matter so as to not get sued later but I'm curious how you can get a Masters or Doctorates degree without first being conferred a Bachelors level degree in an accredited college. I wonder how other academic institutions would feel about it if they were to enroll for a degree without an undergraduate degree in their transcript records.
I guess those students don't give a shit about it, anyway.
Josh Mings
Jun 20, 16 11:25 pm
Just stop. Seriously. You need some Imodium AD for your verbal diarrhea.
Jun 20, 16 11:35 pm
Josh,
Just politely answer or reply for FUCKING GAWD sake. Damn! This fucking attitude is getting damn fucking old.
Sheesh. I asked curtkram for a source. You answered it, albeit rudely. You could have just politely answered and that would have been probably enough. I'm doubt a person earning 5 years of college studies meets the standards of a degree. A degree is conventionally occured in two year or 90 term credits intervals (or semester equivalent). In short, every 90 term credits (a degree... provide you meet the degree's curriculum requirements with the credits). 180 credits, a bachelors. another 90 credits after that, a Masters degree. Another 90 credits after that, a Doctoral. Of course in progressively higher course numbers.
A B.Arch is more closer to a Graduate Certificate (in between Bachelors and Masters degree.
That's just traditional for accredited PUBLIC COLLEGES/UNIVERSITIES.
Josh Mings
Jun 20, 16 11:52 pm
It would just be damn nice if you'd stop spreading misinformation while attempting to present yourself as an expert. You've proven time and again that you are not. It's ok not to know everything.
Also if you think that's rude, you haven't seen anything.
,,,,
Jun 21, 16 3:35 am
HYB-Arch
Hybrid Architecture Degree
The 4+3 Masters in Architecture combines another degree with architecture and deserves its own nomenclature because it represents such a different type of educational experience.
,,,,
Jun 21, 16 3:38 am
^edit
H-Arch
x-jla
Jun 21, 16 1:23 pm
Who cares. A degree is a piece of paper. It's the education that is worth something if you can manage to apply it after graduation. This insecure obsession with credentials, usually some obscure acronym, is pretty much meaningless to the majority of clients. Once you realize this and stop wasting time with "nomenclature" and focus on delivering quality product and service you will actually start making real professional progress...My grandmother used to tell me that "the only thing you can't lose is your education." The experience and knowledge gained is the value, and by emphasizing the importance of nomenclature you are promoting a student that seeks credentials over knowledge...and like a musician who's fame and fortune is their main goal, rather than a result of great music, they will ultimately produce garbage.
,,,,
Jun 21, 16 1:44 pm
To clients it doesn't. To individuals who want to work in academia it does make a difference.
I do not agree with petition, it seems like trying to game the system.
kjdt
Jun 21, 16 2:51 pm
Rick, what happened with Tulane is that when they were in the process of transitioning away from a B.Arch program to various M.Arch tracks, their B.Arch program was found by NAAB to already fulfill all the requirements of a 5+1 post-pro M.Arch track. The university was able to get permission to retroactively "upgrade" certain recent years' B.Arch grads to the M.Arch. Those students received the M.Arch in addition to the B.Arch - not instead of an undergrad degree. This happened after they graduated, and the M.Arch was considered to be a masters earned concurrently with the completion of the undergrad program - thus there was absolutely no impact on anything having to do with financial aid, and their transcripts do in fact include both an undergrad and graduate degree.
The Tulane example occurred almost 20 years ago (I don't recall the exact date but it was sometime in the 1998-2002 zone). It is not currently NAAB's policy to retroactively change degree designations or grant additional degrees to past grads - that is what this petition is trying to change.
I agree with the sentiment that it would be better for you to refrain from participation in threads about which you do not have sufficient knowledge to contribute anything beyond speculation and misinformation.
b3tadine[sutures]
Jun 21, 16 3:01 pm
Dummy can't even frame the argument correctly. Here, Rikki, let me tag in. The interesting thing to consider is this, if I graduated with an M.Arch, spent a shit ton on graduate credits and fees, and then some asshat gets a B.Arch and didn't pay for the fucking thing, then yeah, I'd be pissed off.
Jun 21, 16 3:14 pm
kjdt,
Rick, what happened with Tulane is that when they were in the process of transitioning away from a B.Arch program to various M.Arch tracks, their B.Arch program was found by NAAB to already fulfill all the requirements of a 5+1 post-pro M.Arch track. The university was able to get permission to retroactively "upgrade" certain recent years' B.Arch grads to the M.Arch. Those students received the M.Arch in addition to the B.Arch - not instead of an undergrad degree. This happened after they graduated, and the M.Arch was considered to be a masters earned concurrently with the completion of the undergrad program - thus there was absolutely no impact on anything having to do with financial aid, and their transcripts do in fact include both an undergrad and graduate degree.
Thank you for this information. This makes more sense.
The NAAB allows nomenclature changes for programs that satisfy specific credit requirements. For example, some B.Arch. programs may actually require the same amount of credits as an M.Arch. and some M.Arch. programs may actually require the same amount of credits as a D.Arch. While the NAAb does allow schools to change their degree titles going forward, they are currently not allowing any retroactive title changes. We started a petition to ask that the NAAB allow retroactive title changes so the degree titles of past graduates remains consistent with the current NAAB credit minimums. The petition is available at: https://www.change.org/p/national-architectural-accrediting-board-changing-master-of-architecture-m-arch-to-doctor-of-architecture-d-arch?recruiter=552778358&utm_source=petitions_show_components_action_panel_wrapper&utm_medium=copylink
This is being shared for those who are interested...I am not here to debate the merits or the details of this, so save your hate comments. Thanks.
I already made my hate comment over here.
Sorry. Completely agree with Donna's comment. It's one thing for a M.Arch to be a professional degree. D.Arch is a completely different animal.
I would find that these changes can subsequently cause students and graduates a shit storm with FAFSA. If your degree worked as an undergraduate and then becomes graduate credits, it'll become a problem because certain grant money can only be used for undergraduate studies not graduate level courses. This can also come back and haunt students for back due tuition because of different tuition rates. This can turn into a shit storm.
Maybe I don't understand the processes involved. I'll admit that I don't understand this.
If you don't understand it, don't comment.
Oh JFC.
I am just wondering what the retroactive shit storm that lawyers for FAFSA and/or the universities may cause the students and those who graduated with their degrees trying to get money back for credits that were undergraduate becoming graduate credits.
If for example Johnny got his B.Arch this year and next year, it's reclassified as an M.Arch, and so that 5 year B.Arch credits becomes graduate credits instead of undergraduate credits.
All that Pell Grant and other such grants would have to be repaid to FAFSA and the college may potentially go after that student for the difference in price per credit in tuition. That is a lot of money. So a person who thought their student loan was X amount in now Y amount. What was $13,000 a year for 5 years becomes $35,000 a year. From $65,000 becomes up to like $175,000.
This is what I hope would NOT happen.
Pell grants can only be used for undergraduates credits. If those credits are retroactively converted to graduate credits, oh boy, a shit storm would be brewing big time.
this is absolutely ridiculous. i can't believe anyone would take this serious.
doctorate is for people practicing medicine, juris doctorates, and people who forget how to leave school. that does not describe the contribution i make to the world. i create the world, those other scrubs just practice in it. to share such a petty title with them is an insult.
at the very least i expect the title 'baron' with all associated lands and rights to be bestowed upon me forthwith.
johnny would not have to repay his pell grant.
What if the credits no longer count as undergraduate credits and becomes graduate credits? You can't use pell grants or whatever grants that are for UNDERGRADUATE CREDITS only.
You can't use it for Graduate credits. Therefore those grant money amounts would have to be converted to federal student loans or otherwise be paid back.
The legal issues get ugly.
In my opinion, it's best to not convert students who are already enrolled in undergrad without a previous BA/BS degree) or those who already have their degree. It leads to a lot of problematic issues. The smoothest legal way would be to discontinue such a B.Arch degree through a phase out process and start a new 3-year M.Arch if institution don't have one. The phase out would be to continue undergrad courses for students already enrolled until they finish their degree and only be an option to students admitted & enrolled prior to the date of discontinuance. Then adjust academic requirements for grad students to meet graduate school academic requirements. That is how such suppose to be done. As for D.Archs, that would be additional courses meeting graduate school standards for doctoral studies beyond that of an M.Arch.
Accreditation would have to remain for such a phase out. Once phase out had been completed by students and they all graduated, the B.Arch accreditation would not have to be renewed. There's no short-cutting it in my opinion nor should there be.
there's not takebacks in the pell grant. if you get the pell grant, you get to keep it. retroactively changing the status of your credits would not retroactively change the award.
curtkram,
Ok. If you can support that with some documented law or rule that explicitly governs Pell Grants that are current... that would be better. Just a kind request for a citation of source.
If I was in such position, I'd be pissed and rightly so.
Hey Rick, you know what happened when Tulane changed their B.Arch to M.Arch a while back? People that got the B.Arch were retroactively awarded the M.Arch and they didn't owe a thing. No one took grants away or charged back owed raised tuition.
You're clueless.
I wasn't even aware of the Tulane thing changing their B.Arch to M.Arch. Thank You for a cited source. Maybe the institution did something about the matter so as to not get sued later but I'm curious how you can get a Masters or Doctorates degree without first being conferred a Bachelors level degree in an accredited college. I wonder how other academic institutions would feel about it if they were to enroll for a degree without an undergraduate degree in their transcript records.
I guess those students don't give a shit about it, anyway.
Just stop. Seriously. You need some Imodium AD for your verbal diarrhea.
Josh,
Just politely answer or reply for FUCKING GAWD sake. Damn! This fucking attitude is getting damn fucking old.
Sheesh. I asked curtkram for a source. You answered it, albeit rudely. You could have just politely answered and that would have been probably enough. I'm doubt a person earning 5 years of college studies meets the standards of a degree. A degree is conventionally occured in two year or 90 term credits intervals (or semester equivalent). In short, every 90 term credits (a degree... provide you meet the degree's curriculum requirements with the credits). 180 credits, a bachelors. another 90 credits after that, a Masters degree. Another 90 credits after that, a Doctoral. Of course in progressively higher course numbers.
A B.Arch is more closer to a Graduate Certificate (in between Bachelors and Masters degree.
That's just traditional for accredited PUBLIC COLLEGES/UNIVERSITIES.
It would just be damn nice if you'd stop spreading misinformation while attempting to present yourself as an expert. You've proven time and again that you are not. It's ok not to know everything.
Also if you think that's rude, you haven't seen anything.
HYB-Arch
Hybrid Architecture Degree
The 4+3 Masters in Architecture combines another degree with architecture and deserves its own nomenclature because it represents such a different type of educational experience.
^edit
H-Arch
Who cares. A degree is a piece of paper. It's the education that is worth something if you can manage to apply it after graduation. This insecure obsession with credentials, usually some obscure acronym, is pretty much meaningless to the majority of clients. Once you realize this and stop wasting time with "nomenclature" and focus on delivering quality product and service you will actually start making real professional progress...My grandmother used to tell me that "the only thing you can't lose is your education." The experience and knowledge gained is the value, and by emphasizing the importance of nomenclature you are promoting a student that seeks credentials over knowledge...and like a musician who's fame and fortune is their main goal, rather than a result of great music, they will ultimately produce garbage.
To clients it doesn't. To individuals who want to work in academia it does make a difference.
I do not agree with petition, it seems like trying to game the system.
Rick, what happened with Tulane is that when they were in the process of transitioning away from a B.Arch program to various M.Arch tracks, their B.Arch program was found by NAAB to already fulfill all the requirements of a 5+1 post-pro M.Arch track. The university was able to get permission to retroactively "upgrade" certain recent years' B.Arch grads to the M.Arch. Those students received the M.Arch in addition to the B.Arch - not instead of an undergrad degree. This happened after they graduated, and the M.Arch was considered to be a masters earned concurrently with the completion of the undergrad program - thus there was absolutely no impact on anything having to do with financial aid, and their transcripts do in fact include both an undergrad and graduate degree.
The Tulane example occurred almost 20 years ago (I don't recall the exact date but it was sometime in the 1998-2002 zone). It is not currently NAAB's policy to retroactively change degree designations or grant additional degrees to past grads - that is what this petition is trying to change.
I agree with the sentiment that it would be better for you to refrain from participation in threads about which you do not have sufficient knowledge to contribute anything beyond speculation and misinformation.
Dummy can't even frame the argument correctly. Here, Rikki, let me tag in. The interesting thing to consider is this, if I graduated with an M.Arch, spent a shit ton on graduate credits and fees, and then some asshat gets a B.Arch and didn't pay for the fucking thing, then yeah, I'd be pissed off.
kjdt,
Rick, what happened with Tulane is that when they were in the process of transitioning away from a B.Arch program to various M.Arch tracks, their B.Arch program was found by NAAB to already fulfill all the requirements of a 5+1 post-pro M.Arch track. The university was able to get permission to retroactively "upgrade" certain recent years' B.Arch grads to the M.Arch. Those students received the M.Arch in addition to the B.Arch - not instead of an undergrad degree. This happened after they graduated, and the M.Arch was considered to be a masters earned concurrently with the completion of the undergrad program - thus there was absolutely no impact on anything having to do with financial aid, and their transcripts do in fact include both an undergrad and graduate degree.
Thank you for this information. This makes more sense.