2007 Annual Meeting Wrap-Up

Denver, CO—The hot topic at the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards’ Annual Meeting and Conference was ARE^® Timing. The issue was thoroughly debated, discussed, and examined. Reciprocity, states’ rights, and IDP were the key words heard throughout the debate. In the end, Member Boards voted on Resolution 07-8 and passed it as amended.

Member Boards considered two resolutions related to the sequencing of the Intern Development Program (IDP) and the Architect Registration Examination^® (ARE^®). Both allowed individual jurisdictions to determine when a candidate is eligible to begin taking the exam, but one, Resolution 07-8, would have affected when a candidate would be allowed to finish the examination. Resolution 07-8 stated a candidate may begin the exam when he or she has fulfilled their jurisdiction’s education requirement and enrolled in IDP, but would only be allowed to take the Construction Documents & Services and Building Design & Construction Systems divisions upon the completion of IDP.

The body moved to amend the resolution to simply state, “To begin taking the ARE an applicant shall have fulfilled all requirements for eligibility established by his or her jurisdiction and shall have enrolled in IDP by establishing a Council record.” Then further amended the amendment to state, “And finally Resolved, that it is the intent and policy of the Council that all jurisdictions accept NCARB certification as a basis for reciprocal registration without the application of any other state requirements applicable to initial licensure in such state.”

Resolution 07-9, the second resolution related to ARE timing, was withdrawn following the amendments to Resolution 07-8.

Currently in the majority of NCARB’s 54 jurisdictions, the NCARB Certificate is the main requirement for reciprocity. Until now, NCARB has had no position on the sequencing of the three requirements for licensure (education, experience, and examination), but recommended candidates earn a NAAB-accredited degree, complete IDP, and then pass the ARE.  Over forty jurisdictions have adopted this sequence and some will continue to require it in the future. Nine jurisdictions currently allow IDP and the ARE to be completed concurrently.

Although the NCARB Board of Directors strongly believes the sequencing of IDP and ARE should not affect reciprocity and the acceptance of the NCARB Certificate, some jurisdictions expressed that the sequencing could influence whether an architect would be granted reciprocity. Candidates should contact their state board for their position on this topic and how the passage of Resolution 07-8, as amended, will affect their jurisdiction.

One thing most jurisdictions did agree on was the importance of IDP in the licensure process. All jurisdictions require an experience component and 51 require the IDP program, including those that already allow concurrent IDP and ARE completion. In order to earn the NCARB Certificate, candidates will continue to be required to complete IDP.

---

The Future of the Intern Development Program

Updating and improving the Intern Development Program (IDP) was one of the main focuses of this year’s Annual Meeting. Two workshops were presented on the Council’s plans for the future of the program: IDP Documentation and The Future of the Intern Development Program.

IDP Documentation: Create the Best Experience
Last year the Committee on the Intern Development Program recommended a four-month rule for reporting IDP training units. After discussion at the 2006 Annual Meeting, the committee was charged to reevaluate its recommendation. This year the committee came back with a six-month documentation requirement for discussion by the Member Boards and a plan to propose a resolution at the 2008 or 2009 Annual Meeting.

The proposed rule would require interns to document and report their IDP training units after every six months of employment in a recognized training setting. Interns will have 45 business days to turn in each report after the end of the six-month period. The intent of the rule is to get supervisors and interns together more regularly to ensure the intern is exposed to and trained in the 16 training areas.

NCARB’s Director of IDP, Harry Falconer Jr., AIA, and Member Board Executive Glenda Loving from Iowa led the discussion on the proposed training documentation period. 

The resolution was originally intended for this year’s Annual Meeting, but it was decided it would be better to explain to Member Boards and interns the reasoning and benefits behind the proposed rule before the Council would vote on it, Falconer said in one of two workshops held during the week to discuss the rule.

Misunderstanding of the rule has caused some to see it as an obstacle rather than a benefit and a way to improve the overall IDP program, which is its intent. “This is not a punishment, it is a way to strengthen the experience,” said Stephen Dent, IDP Committee member, New Mexico, during the discussion.

First and foremost, interns should understand that the rule would be required only for those that establish a Council Record after the implementation date tentatively scheduled for 2009 and not for those already in progress of completing IDP or those that begin before the implementation date, Falconer said.

Mississippi recently enacted an amnesty period to their rule requiring interns to report their IDP training units every four months and its Member Board Executive Jenny Wilkinson shared the board’s experience with the discussion group.  “Right before the four-month rule went into effect, candidates were trying to go back five years to record their experience. That information just cannot be accurate,” said Wilkinson, “We really need this rule.”  “It is a disservice to the program to not have this rule,” she said.

For more information on the proposed six-month rule, please read the Fall 2007 Direct Connection in late September.

The Future of the Intern Development Program: Evolution or Revolution?
IDP Committee chair, Kenneth Schwartz, FAIA, Virginia; Region 4 Director Scott Veazey, AIA; and recently licensed architect Marnique Heath, AIA, led the discussion on how to best improve IDP for the future.

The path to licensure is often compared to a three-legged stool. Experience, education, and examination make up the legs that keep the stool stable. Both education and examination are well researched and funded, but experience hasn’t received as much attention. In order to change that, 2007 President Bob Luke put into motion a major evaluation of the IDP program that will continue into the next couple of years.

“The ARE is the envy of other professions,” said IDP Committee chair Ken Schwartz, “Experience now needs the same attention and dedication as the ARE.”

In order to improve the IDP, NCARB and AIA conducted Core Competencies and Mentor Evaluation studies and the findings were made available at the Annual Meeting. The NCARB National office Task Force Report also released their evaluation of the performance of NCARB’s Records Department. A summary of each of the studies’ findings will be in the Fall 2007 Direct Connection.

“The IDP Program is about 30 years old,” said Scott Veazey, AIA. “The studies conducted will allow the Council to make information-based changes to improve the program,” he said.

Near the top of the list of items to address is the training of supervisors and mentors. “Supervisors and mentors are the weakest link, but perhaps the easiest to fix,” said Jerry Ritter, Minnesota. NCARB’s Committee on the IDP plans to develop a code of conduct and training for supervisors as a first step in improving their role.

Marnique Heath, AIA, completed the IDP program and is currently a supervisor and mentor at her firm in Washington, DC. She said there needs to be more guidance for both interns and supervisors as they go through the process. “There were no clear guidelines or assistance to help me learn,” she said.

Heath highly recommended that interns enroll in IDP during their final year of schooling. She also recommended the adoption of contemporaneous reporting to help keep interns focused.

“The guidance from my professor and being around other students that were doing the same thing as me was very beneficial,” she said.

“Once you enter your firm, it is easy to lose focus, I know I did,” Heath said, “If I would have had a required six-month reporting period that is being proposed, I probably would have finished two years earlier than I did.”

For more about the plan to improve the IDP program, please read the Fall 2007 Direct Connection.