What I found interesting about these various articles (and follow ups) was another article that talked about how valuable an architecture degree was – but not for architecture! The team building and problem solving skills were considered useful for any number of non-architecture businesses. (see The Architect’s Newspaper, December issue). I think that fits with the comments above – architects are certainly trained to do something; buildings may not be one of them.
From an article posted on Yahoo:
Four Foolish Majors To Avoid
Opportunity Killer #4: Architecture Unemployment Rate for Recent College Graduates: 13.9 percent.
http://education.yahoo.net/articles/degrees_not_to_earn.htm?kid=1NUJI
The last two posts illustrate part of the problem. The Architects Newspaper attempts to make the point (and I agree) that architects have the skills to work across a broad range of non-architecture businesses but articles outside of architecture tend to see architectural grads as having a very narrow focus and a very narrow path to a career.
Of course this will lend rise to the belief that recent grads would have a better chance in the job market (outisde of traditional architecture) if they had a title that did not sound like a transitional title. (Intern, in training, etc.)
I know I am in the minority but I believe licensed architects should be called Licensed Architect and an architectural grad (from an approved program) should be called architect. The title alone will make very little difference but it is a start to giving the degree more reach and giving the graduates more options.
Really don’t need a new title [Licensed Architect] since RA is widely used indicating “Regstered Architect”
Also, you must read the state registration laws to see who can use the word “architect” in any context. Some are quire strict on this point
What position(s) have the various state licensing boards taken regarding the use of the term computer or programming architect?
I have no opinion on the title (Licensed or Registered), either is fine with me. However I believe that the term “architect” should be allowed to architectural grads so their employment options are increased (however slightly it might be) outside of traditional architectural jobs.
I realize that state regs have very strict rules about who can use the term. These are the regs that I think need to change. Many such regs might not stand up in court anyway. Some have already been overturned in court so the precedents have already been established. Licnesed/Registered Architects do not own the term even though they attempt legislate as though they do.
I realize this is an old fight and it has strong opposition within the profession. I just believe that a grad who is titled an architectural intern will have a difficult time competing for jobs with engineers or construction manager grads who have titles upon garduation that do not make them appear to be incomplete with their education. Obviously any entry level grad has a great deal of training left to obtain but architecture grads are percieved (outside of the profession) to be less complete upon graduation than the typical major and that puts architecture grads at a disadvantage in the job market. Just my opinion,sorry for getting up on my soap box on this never-ending arguement.
I might sound like a person who has been living under a rock, but when did the term “intern” become so strongly associated with unpaid work and people who haven’t graduated yet? Some people even call “intern” a degrading term. (Maybe that started with Clinton.)
My mom is a doctor, and I was born while she was an intern. This is after she had graduated from Columbia medical school as an M.D., and was accepted into, a residency program in pediatrics. So, as I was growing up, an “intern” was someone who had accomplished quite a bit, education-wise, but who was only starting out in her paid career, and who was still learning things on the job.
Maybe the term really does have a different meaning than it used to have. And I know that in some businesses, interns are unpaid, but sometimes they’re getting school credit. And sometimes they’re just getting coffee for people. But being an architectural intern never felt degrading to me. I only wrapped up being an intern in 2002.
Intern as used in architecture is different from a medical intern who, presumably, has a time limit for internship and residency - I don’t think that a hospital would let you be an intern indefinitely. Thats a significant difference you could be an architectural intern for the several decades of your entire career, with probably little push-back, at many firms.
Intern in the unpaid or underpaid business sense, as I understand it, refers to a person still in college who is doing a summer or semester internship. We do that in architecture too, and that is a source of confusion. Although with the recent changes from the sequential “education internship examination” course to a more simultaneous course, the distinction has been blurred between student intern and early professional intern.
Internship strikes me as a muddy term for what we do in architecture. Although it does sound archaic, apprenticeship may be a much more accurate term. I wonder how apprentice architect would sound to todays youth? Probably dusty and Dickensian.
My concern has never been how the term intern sounds to the student/intern. It never felt degrading or offensive to me either, however I took a traditional path to my career: get a degree, intern for an architect, and so on.
The issue arises when the unemployment rate for arch. grads reaches 13-14% and kids are looking for positions outside of “working for an architect”. The architectural education (IMO) makes a graduate very capable of filling entry level positions at any number of areas. IE: assistant to the facilities manager at a hospital, assistant to the director of buildings and grounds at a school district or college, assistant to the director of renovation and tennant improvements at a large facility (Willis tower?) and the list could go on.
My point is that when the architectural grad can not get a job in their originally chosen field and is forced (or interested)in applying for jobs outside of the “traditional path” they have to compete with graduates that have degrees in engineering or construction management or something similar. The engineer’s resume says he is an engineer. The construction manager’s resume says he is a construction manager. The architectural degree graduate has to compete against these individuals for these jobs with a title that makes the preparation of the architectural grad look to be incomplete when in actuality it may be more advanced.
I don’t care if the term intern makes the kids feel degraded. I worry that the term intern contributes to them being unemployed. It is the perception of the employer that is in question and I will acknowledge that allowing an architectural grad to use the term architect (while reserving Licensed or Registered Architect for those lawfully allowed to practice) will not in and of itself solve the problem, however I believe it has the potential to help. It could also come in handy for the 45 year old who never got licensed and now finds themselves unemployed and looking for work outside of an architect’s office.
With respect an Engineering grad refering to themselves as Engineers prior to getting their PE; I speak from experience - Altho’ I’m a graduate of an engineering degree at ODU, I was chastised severely for refering to myself as an engineer without the added title of PE.
I find that Engineers (PE’s) are also very particular about how their term (title)is used.
This article has been a topic of interest on various bulletins and blogs for several months now (along with the discussion of who can call themselves an “architect”). The article I find uninformed and misleading, the discussion about title I find tiresome.
The fact is that the market for recent graduates of architecture has generally been limited to professional design firms of which there are a very limited number. There are exceptions; for a while in the 1980s when Bill Mitchell was teaching in Los Angeles, many of his students wound up working for computer-based animation studios. There continues to be a somewhat specialized market for architectural graduates with strong computer visualization skills in this market, but this is, again, somewhat limited.
I believe that most undergraduate architectural programs represent the last true liberal arts programs in terms of requiring understanding of a wide range of disciplines (physics, math, literature, drawing, arts, social science, etc.). Other university disciplines tend to regard architecture majors as glorified drafters, but when they really get into the guts of the requirements, they are very surprised.
Personnel recruiters are even more challenged because they really understand neither the requirements for the position for which they are hiring nor the expertise of those they are trying to match for the job.
My favorite trivia question? Which architect is featured most often on US postage stamps (hint: it’s a trick question). The answer is Thomas Jefferson. In his time, a working knowledge of architecture was part of what it meant to be an educated person. Today you can get a college degree without knowing that New York City is a port located on the East Coast. Yet a person with that abysimal level of general knowledge might beat out an architectural graduate for a position (I am assuming that the baby architect knows where New York is).
As the economy grows even more rapidly toward the next bubble, recent architecture grads will find entry level jobs in design firms since they need CAD jockeys to speed production. Some of the silver foxes laid off over the last 3 years will not work again. It is an enormous indictment of the economics of architectural practice that this is the way it will happen, but that is the way it will be. The silver foxes will begin to find jobs again when firms find that they must have the “architectural” expertise and not just the CAD expertise.
When they are not entitled to use “R.A.”, “AIA” or “P.E.” or other indicator of professional license or certification, many people use indicators after their names of earned degrees, such as B.A., M.A., M.S., B.Arch., M.Arch, Ph.D., etc. when they are entitled to use these. (I can understand reluctance to use “B.S.”)
I see many unlicensed architects use the initials “R.A.” for Registered Architect. “A.I.A.” is not the only identifier of “real” architects.
Of all the enforcement actions reported in California by the Architects Registration Board, the most prevalent one is unauthorized use of the title “Architect.” Reading the history behind the enforcement actions, there are usually egregious misrepresentations by some persons who are not only presenting themselves as an architect but are very incompetent in their actions.
Parallels would not only be the medical profession but construction contractors. Fraud is a nice word for what some unlicensed contractors do. Watch “Holmes on Homes” on tv to get an idea of how bad it can get.
Architects not only “make pretty” and “green” but are responsible for the design complying with building codes (THE LAW), especially fire and life safety. This is not a trivial matter of “the establishment” trying to keep out those whom it doesn’t like.
One solution is to put in the time and energy to pass the architectural registration exam. Another is to be satisfied with “LEED AP” or even “CSI” after one’s name. And initials representing certifications, such as “CDT”, “CCS”, “CCCA” and “CCPR” are meaningful and respected by those who understand what they mean and the effort it takes to earn them.
By the way, annually SCIP gives an award for the member with the most initials after his/her name. It’s known as the “EIEIO” award … and, of course … the recipient is entitled to add these letters to their their pedigree.
I wonder if G.O.B. (Good Ol’ Boy) is legitimate. I don’t think “S.O.B.” and “P.D.Q.” are commonly used, although they may be truthful. (What’s the gender-neutral version of “S.O.B.”?) “B.F.F.” hasn’t seemed to catch on in professional communications.
The fact is that the market for recent graduates of architecture does not need to be limited to professional design firms. I would like to see the profession make attempts to make architecural grads more marketable outside of design firms because having higher unemployment rankings then most other professions will damage the profession in the long run by discouraging future students from entering the field.
I am not sure what the solution is. I would like to help improve the options available to recent grads but I quess I don’t know how. Still, sitting on our hands and waiting for the economy to recover does not feel like enough to me.
John;
“P.D.Q”? I am familiar with P.D.Q. Bach, but was unaware that architects were familiar with Polynomial Differential Quadrature.
Ellis, I presume you’re joking.
Pretty Darn Quick (the more acceptable version) has been around much longer than I. My father, a Holocaust-survivor immigrant who earned his citizenship by enlisting in the US Army Air Force in WWII was fond of using it when letting me know I was bordering on a reprimand.
Ken;
Actually when I wrote my quip I had forgotten “Pretty Darn Quick” (and its variations). I will claim senioritus or not enough caffeine. That’s it: caffeine deficiency.
All I can add is that while young intern architects are having difficulty getting a position, this is true in many other fields as well. Everyone is facing the issue of staying in their field or trying something else. You really have to asses the impact of such a move on your career goals. I’m not sure I agree that the terminology gives someone with an architecture degree a disadvantage over other degrees.
back when I started work (in the mid-70’s) the architectural world was so bleak that the UW College of Architecture and Planning (it was called that back then) said that only 23% of their recent graduates got jobs in architecture. And, I was one of those people – even though I didn’t have an architecture degree (and still don’t). We’ve had this discussion before; the degree may possibly get you in the door, but it won’t keep you there – only good work habits and some semblance of social skills will move you up the firm. An architectural graduate should be able to craft their resume to point out their various skills, and background experience. And, I should mention that many of the firms I’m aware of have been hiring practice specialists, many of whom are not architects at all. We’ve got licensed realtors in our office; marketing specialists; I’ve worked with former registered nurses (as part of a hospital practice) and people with construction management backgrounds. if students think the degree alone will get them in the door – they are talking to the wrong people.
Like Anne, I have no architecture degree either. Had a 30 year career at design firms in spite of that, and recently retired. Having no degree never held me back.
I started in the late 60’s as a junior draftsman and don’t have a degree in Architecture. I am licensed in Arizona & Connecticut.
The late John Dinkeloo (Kevin Roche John Dinkeloo and Associates, where I basically “grew up”) always maintained that someone could go through the firm without a degree and still get licensed. I did. I started writing specs full time in the mid-1990’s. Everything I know, I learned from some of the greatest and best people in the profession. Unlike John B., I’m still working.