After announcing last summer that it would "sunset" the term "intern" from its nomenclature, NCARB has now begun enacting that transition with the Intern Development Program, which will be renamed the Architectural Experience Program (AXP). The change will become effective on June 29 of this year.
NCARB is quick to remind architects (current and aspiring) that, as states still set their own terms for licensure, this update to the not-yet-an-architect label will not affect who may call themselves an "architect" – a term still reserved for those who are licensed. To minimize confusion, existing regulations that refer to the new AXP title will be accompanied by: "formerly known as the Intern Development Program, or IDP" – just like Prince.
As for how to refer to actual people, NCARB is sticking with "aspiring architects" or "exam candidates" for those who aren't yet licensed, and "architects" for those who are, while also deferring to the authority of individual licensing boards to decide what to call unlicensed architects.
In a press release issued yesterday, NCARB President Dennis Ward, AIA, is quoted as saying: “Renaming the IDP is another step in realigning our programs to better reflect current practice and terminology... For example, one firm may refer to a non-licensed employee as a ‘senior designer’ while another uses the title ‘project manager.’ Yet, neither is likely to introduce that individual to clients as an ‘intern.”
You can read the complete press release here.
More news from NCARB:
19 Comments
A step in the right direction
"junior architectural knowledge program for non-intern peoples wishing to someday use the title of architect once they have completed the appropriate course of action to do so"
sounds better
Why not Architect-In-Training, similar to EIT? Too obvious I guess.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineer_in_Training
I just love how AXP falls off the tongue...
^ that would be very dangerous...the US would turn into a horrible slum like Northern Europe where the leading cause of death is Architecture.
And old architects would feel less special causing a massive epidemic of anti-depressant drug abuse and ultimately lead to a return of sad looking brutalism.
Hell, my firm just dropped the title and call us designers now. Dropping IDP as a name for a checklist though, pointless... AXP sounds like some new drug on the street that all the kids are talking about, NCARB needs to take some lessons on acronyms from the military...
it's all make believe, keep the cash flow through this bullshit
wiggin: It's a symbolic move, but not pointless. If we're no longer "interns", then who is developing from the *I*DP?
Just like dropping the 1,800 elective hours, this isn't going to affect my timeline to licensure much, but it's a positive step.
Way off-topic, but Mr Wiggin, that comment reminds me of Brian Regan's bit about walkie talkies.
AXP and the XP part sounds like something taken from the page of the Nintendo generation. LOL.
So now all these hours can now be treated like eXperience Points. So now we just need 3840 or so Architectural eXperience Points (AXP)
^now that's funny!
Good intentions but poor eXPecution. It's definitely gamer terminology. And really?! Do we have to be diminished to "Aspiring" Architects or Candidates? Even George Castanza could be considered an aspiring Architect. It just feels demeaning to the dedication, effort and sacrifice involved to even be on the path to become a Licensed Architect. And don't get me started on Candidate. I picture us all wearing the same jumpers and sneakers, standing in line somewhere, anxiously awaiting approval.
I have 15 years experience, completed the ARE's and only need to finish the California supplemental but still feel in limbo until I am allowed to use the title. I respect the title and agree that it belongs to those licensed but there has to be a better solution/term/title for those that are earning XP, registered for exams, etc. You don't want to hear the long winded explanation that I go through each time I meet someone new. Am I nearly licensed, yes, do I want to explain the exam process each time, no...
I also know that this is a complex issue but hey, we're Architects, (ahem, they're Architects) we should be able to solve this with logic and aesthetics applied, no?
I say, back to the drawing board NCARB.
Oh yeah, even Architecture instead of Architectural would be better. At least it wouldn't sound like a continuing education lunch n learn.
Nathan,
You just want to be called Architect, right?
Hi Rick, when I'm licensed/registered, yes. Until then there's got to be something better than NCARB's suggestions.
Nathan,
Ok...... why are we getting too worked up over it. There's no singular official title. When you are an employee, that's what you are. An employee in an architectural firm. The firm uses job position titles but you don't have any licensed credential title conferred. There is none until you undergo the bureaucratic process of licensing under the applicable licensing bureaucracy.
When you open up your business, you can call yourself just about anything you want within compliance of applicable legal matters.
Just sharing my opinion RickB, however overly-caffeinated it may have been. Maybe that's the worked up sense you're getting but not my intention. cheers
no prob.
I am not sure if there is much of a better name or title that NCARB can really give a person non-licensed. An unlicensed person can be anyone on any path that could possibly lead to licensure. We don't have much we can do.
Even people who move into non conventional experiences due to life circumstances may still aspire to become an architect.
When a person is labeled, "Architect-in-training" is saying you are an architect and the fact of the matter is, every architect is in training continuously.
You don't have to use intern. There is no requirement to do so.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.