Just Passed All Exams - General Thoughts on entire Process
1. It takes wayyyyyyyyyyy to long to get licensed.
2. The pay is a joke for how qualified you need to be.
3. We should get an AR title like a DR title. Ar. Smith is better than Mr. Smith, Architect or Mr. Smith RA
4. While you're testing there needs to be an interim title similar to "residency" or "resident" so the general public knows what you are doing and what it leads to. All in hopes of avoiding awkward conversation about where you are in your career.
5. The testing material is way to hard to find and expensive.
6. The tests are way to expensive.
7. School is not based in reality, when it should be.
8. We could do a better job of grouping ourselves together for all areas post college.
9. Architecture has to have some of the worst office culture. It starts with studio
10. Architecture school has to be completely rethought and based in reality. Staying up all night was not helpful whatsoever.
-
100% to all of this!! there needs to be a big change in this field, beginning with the education system and its tie in to the tests and the real world
the official title and the residency-type label are really great ideas that would be taking a step in the right direction, it's like we're thrown to the wolves in this process while other professional fields have a functioning and rewarding system in place, one in which your expensive and intensive education actually prepares you for becoming a licensed professional
studio is absolutely to blame for the horrifying office culture problem
-
i agree. compare other trades (pro and non-professional): Electrician goes to electrical school and comes out as an electrician, same with a plumber, nurse, dentist.... But an architect??? school is not enough, experience is not enough. we have to go through a rigorous process. and then take exams, hoping you'll pass. otherwise, you can't call your self an architect :(
-
Some of that is certainly true, but it's a much broader discussion, right?
One thing we can all do immediately, regardless of whether you're a student, in IDP or a practicing Architect...communicate with young people who are thinking about entering the profession. Don't be completely throwing shade; many of us enjoy this work in general. But be realistic...about what school will entail, what working in an office is like, realistic pay/salaries, advancement, the ARE and getting licensed. This can have a really large effect. For example, I know several people who got four year architecture degrees having no clue that they have just spent all that money and time on an education that does not fit NCARBS requirement of "professional" degree. Then cannot get licensed in most states. That's a serious ooof. Someone could have told them
But aside from that, just shepherd young people. Invite them into the office, help on their high school projects, and so forth. Let them learn from your experience. I think one of the biggest struggles, and a big failing of architecture programs, is a failure to impart understanding of the real world to students. They focus on Design to the exclusion of other topics that deserve more focus. And then, many of us have been bitterly surprised, that there is actual almost no opportunity to engage in what we apparently love so much and have invested so much in....Design. We are thrown into the quagmire of Submittals, Door Schedules, toilet elevations, stair sections, window details, and so forth. Or driven into project management where our world becomes nothing but arguments, meetings, schedule delays, headaches and budget responsibilities and an always unhappy Owner. (OK, I am a little bitter) We have to let the young people know that if they really want to DESIGN, they are going to have to be really, really good and then fight very hard in a firm to be granted a position where they can have a significant effect or control the design process.
NCARB is horrible, for sure. It seriously seems like they go out of their way to purposefully make the process as difficult as possible. Knowing the vast majority of us do not have much money. It's really intolerable. I don't know if it's a bunch of old white men in ivory-tower academia that are developing the process and requirements, but it's certainly not our peers, that's for sure. I wish there was a way to see into that process.
Sometimes our own state professional licensing boards are not helpful either, and do not always see eye-to-eye with NCARB.
I just think that other professionals watch out for themselves more than architects do. Lawyers, doctors and other professionals seem like they are smarter about their licensing bodies and shaping career paths. OK, yeah, a BS, Med School, exams and residency are certainly grueling, expensive and lengthy. But generally medical professionals are paid well. And lawyers, well....nuf said. But architects almost seem to relish being in a position where they are responsible for so much scope and take responsibility that is beyond the level of where most people would expect it to be, We are on the hook for almost everything and often our contracts seem to give others more rights then us. Even when we have tight contracts, we decline to pursue legal action when it's justified and don't capitalize on the terms of the contract when we are entitled to.
Developers certainly know this and take advantage of it all the time. They know they won't be sued by the architect and will shove as much liability and profit-reducing scope on them as possible. Instead, Architects opt to not upset the Owner and just do the additional work and lose additional money. Almost every aspect of what we do can be a quicksand trap where our fees disappear. Many firms are started by good architects who are bad business people...they put people and "design" above their own self-interests. And those of their employees. All this means that we can expect to make far far less than a peer in the medical or legal professions.
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
5 comments