M-m-m-m-m-more Baltimore Basilica

Enjoy some dome Photos from Today's touring group - it was slow, so the security guard and I hit it.

Titles

I try to be as modest about our profession as politely possible, but there are some things that just get on my nerves.  For example, we toil away in architecture school for 5 years, fumble around in our new-found profession for 3 years of the required internship only to conclude our pre-licensed life with 7 excruciating registration exams.  Throughout the whole process, of course, constantly deciphering the new rules and regulations of an ever-changing path-to-licensure and construction industry, in general.  And all for what?  To call ourselves architects.

Meanwhile, there exist some computer nerds who spend a few months in an IT certification course that earns them the rights to be called software "architects" or systems "architects," or whatever charming prefacing noun you'd prefer to conjure.  I recently saw an article citing someone as "an architect of 'insert-written-document-title-here.'"  This little snippet, hopefully intended as a metaphor, was what set me off tonight.  I feel like we work so hard to earn that title, whereas some people just attach to their own lackluster professions in order to sound more important.  I feel like our profession is suffering enough lately, without all this terminology defamation to cloud the significance of the title "architect."

Anyway, that's just my little puff of smoke for today.  It just seems that our profession is so persistent in its preservation of the integrity of that title, all the while outside industries degrade it with such unbridled usage.

See more on titles here.

NCARB 2.0 IS COMING

So currently my email inbox is full of notices for NCARB 2.0. Which is a nice change from having constant emails from Coldwater Creek. (You buy your mom one sweater, one time and then you get something everyday for a year) The NCARB emails prompted a webinar to go over the basics, and I felt a need to sum them up here. I know that JoFeb has covered this topic before, so I'll try and be concise.

The main differences between the new system and the old one come from a change in the work settings and experience categories. Basically, it's a merging of some categories and an expanding of others while creating a more concise way of assigning responsibility. I would recommend looking at the following PDFs for specifics.

5600 Hour Breakdown

and

IDP Rollover Map

While it seems most of the changes are pretty minor, the rollover may cause some of the hours to be lost in the transition or transferred to other categories, that is, if you do not meet the current requirements. For some of us who have a hard time obtaining specific category hours, this is not great news.

I understand the changes are a means to keep up with the evolving requirements of the architectural field, (more international work, field office sites, satellite locations, etc.) but it seems that all of these changes favor large or mega firms over small to medium ones. The changes alienate a design firm or architectural practice that would need to sub out for speciality work. Granted, you would be hard pressed to find one that wouldn't do their own specs, but it just comes off as leaning to more powerful firms rather than measuring actual experience.

The other issue can be found can be in the category of "Academic Internships" which cover experience settings A & O. (More information on the experience settings can be found here.)

This section is pretty vague and the website does not really help to clarify:

In IDP 2.0 interns may earn up to 930 hours of experience credit in any of the IDP experience areas (except for 4B: Leadership and Service) through qualifying academic internships that meet the durational requirements and are in [experience setting A or O].

This seems redundant. If your internship was already qualified in section A or O, then why would you bother routing it through your school? Wouldn't you just go directly through the employer? I'm sorry NCARB, but that gets you another one of these:


Finally, there is fundamentally a problem with requiring a registered architect to sign off on budgetary estimates. This is a rollover from the old system that just seems odd. A/E firms are naturally expected to present budgetary estimates to clients, but it seems that it would make more sense to have a construction contractor confirm estimate pricing rather than a supervising architect, as they would be the one actually doing the work.

Not really 2.0's fault, so we'll just give them a "seriously?"


In the interest of fairness, not all of the changes are bad. On the plus side, the category changes do present a better means of streamlining responsibility. Rather than having the A,B,C,D,E,F,FF system that was confusing and vaguely indifferent, the A,S,O covers a lot of the "in between" oversight responsibility which previously was going unchecked.

All and all, NCARB 2.0, a mixed bag. Tyrion Lannister, bring us home.


Also, if you can't tell, I have been getting INVOLVED with Game of Thrones. Best. Show. Evar.

NCARB Study Materials for the ARE's

In case I haven't already made myself clear about how valuable the study materials are that are provided by NCARB, let me say so again specifically here!  Find these resources here (so long as NCARB doesn't reorganize their website by the time you click on that!).

What I also wanted to point out in this post pertains specifically to the Construction Documents & Services exam.  There are sample AIA documents available for download to study in preparation for the exam.  The conditions for downloading these documents are 1.) that you have an NCARB record established and 2.) that you have received your Authorization to Test.  You obtain the AIA documents by logging into your NCARB record and clicking on a link at the bottom of the left-hand column.  It says:

New!  ARE Candidates:  Construction Documents & Services Resources From AIA.

Clicking on the link takes you to a screen where you must enter your ATT number.  Upon successful login you will have access to the following documents:

A101-2007
A201-2007
A305-1986
A701-1997
B101-2007 ExA
B101-2007
C401-2007
G701-2001
G702-1992
G703-1992
G704-2000

I am finding a lot of reference to AIA document B141, which as you can see is not on the list above. Therefore, I will have to find some other means to obtain an untainted copy of this document.

Structural Systems Results

There are few things about this ARE process that bring me any joy.  Receiving that letter in the mail which reads "PASS" is most certainly number one on the list!!

And this time, they didn't even send me a duplicate of the previous test results as a teaser!  Such relief!

3 down, 4 to go...

Architectureworld starring Kevin Costner and Dennis Hopper circa 1995

The expression I've often heard when it comes to finance is : "Invest in land, there's only so much of it". Which is typically good advice.

However, because architects are not businessmen, some of them are looking to build in the ocean. Like volcano in a tropical sea. Only much, much, much more expensive. Results = pretty cool.

Watertime!

Though, I can't help but have some of these schemes remind me of "Sea-Britain" from Arrested Development

I've made a huge mistake

More thoughts on the ARE's

You know, it occurred to me, since they have altered the ARE sections, there have been other changes that have been implemented concurrently.  They got rid of the separate history exam some time ago and instead "incorporated" the history questions into all sections of the exam.  I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that you pretty much need a bachelor of architecture to take the exam now, which implies that you have had several semesters of architectural history.  Whereas in the old days, you didn't even need a college degree much less a bachelors of architecture to take the exam!  How else could NCARB ensure you had some sort of architectural history education if not testing you about it themselves?  Therefore, I think they perhaps got rid of that exam because it was no longer necessary - kind of redundant - given that most if not all ARE candidates have had secondary schooling in architecture.

That was a thought that occurred to me today that I thought I should share.  I don't have any actual chronology that would connect the two (the time when a bachelors became a prereq for the ARE's and exactly when they got rid of the history exam), but I feel it is a sufficient enough correlation for this recreational conjecture!

Fun Facts about the ARE's

Some new information about the ARE's has been brought to my attention lately.  My two sources are: 1.) the second-hand reports of some folks who attended an AIA chapter meeting where an NCARB representative presented information on the processes involved in establishing an NCARB records through taking the ARE's and receiving an NCARB certificate.  2.) my newly received Fall 2011 Volume 14 Issue 2 of NCARB's Direct Connection (I am just now realizing that this issue has arrived to me rather late, as it is no longer fall and certainly no longer 2011).

First of all, each ARE is graded through one single computer.  So, while it may seem a stream-lined process to have all the exams graded via computer, it is actually not as stream-lined as many other standardized testing systems.  The justification for this, is to maintain security as apparently many folks in the past have taken extremes to illegally obtaining exam questions and answers.  Now, because it is all graded through one computer, it is also graded by one individual operating the computer.  Therefore, if any answers or questions are leaked to the public, NCARB knows who is responsible.  A tremendous amount of responsibility for one individual!  However, knowing some of the limitations of NCARB, I agree this is an appropriate measure for the time being.

Second of all, each ARE (aside from Schematic Design which does not have multiple choice questions) contains "pretest" questions.  These "pretest" questions "will not affect a candidate's actual test score and are not included in the content distribution breakdown.  These pretest questions will be evaluated and may be included in future editions of the test."  I have extracted those explanations directly from NCARB's publication.  I am a little perturbed by this.  I have had occasion to find fault with some of the questions on the exams I have taken so far.  It is logical to suppose that some of these less refined questions I have encountered may in fact be "pretest" questions, but they also may just be faulty questions.  I'm not sure of the point I am trying to make other than it is most distressful to find controversial questions when you are in the throes of a $210 professional examination, the unsuccessful completion of which may delay your professional development by a period of at least 6 months.

Anyway, I just wanted to report those discoveries to you under the guise that knowledge is power (although, as for the pretest questions, I think that knowledge is frustration!).

In summary: 1.) every single ARE is processed through one single computer, as operated by one single individual human. 2.) each ARE may contain "pretest" questions which do not count toward the final assessment of your performance on it.