Last night,
I had the pleasure of serving on a panel entitled “The License Dilemma”
sponsored the by the Emerging Architects Committee of AIA DC. Joining me was Adam Schwartz, AIA, a recently licensed architect and Associate at
HGA Architects and Engineers and the Washington DC Licensing Advisor and Harry Falconer, Jr., AIA, Director of
Experience + Education at NCARB.
Moderating the panel was Elizabeth
Kinkel, Associate AIA of View Dynamic Glass. …
-->
However, the
thrust of the discussion both from us as panelists and the audience, mostly
emerging professionals, was on the value of licensure and how WE (the
profession) could do more to ensure architectural graduates would pursue
licensure. Harry relayed statistics from
NCARB by the Numbers that stated that the average age of an architect becoming
licensed was 32 years of age. With
recent changes in IDP (soon to be AXP), the timeframe from graduation to
licensure is decreasing.
Some of the
discussion was on what architecture programs (schools) could do; as will be the
case with IPAL, schools might provide or encourage students to gain experience
during their formal education making them more valuable to firms upon
graduation. But also, many in the
audience thought schools could provide more direct knowledge on practice. However, I pointed out that our system of
becoming an architect includes knowledge from education and knowledge from
experience.
Unfortunately,
some firms are not equipped to “teach” their employees like a hospital might do
with aspiring doctors. For firms, it is
a business proposition – my answer to firms is the “your people” are your most
important asset. One member of the
audience specifically asked – what could WE do to help firms more value their
staff as they work towards licensure; no one had an immediate answer.
Mr. Falconer
furthered the conversation with the notion that an architectural should pursue
licensure not for their current position, but for their next one. Adam relayed the sense of accomplishment when
he had achieved the title of architect.
Additional
discussion centered on those architectural graduates that pursue an alternate
path and not licensure. We know that
these individuals are NOT architects (in the legal sense), but are they are
part of the profession.
Overall, the
event was a success in terms of attendance, but more importantly in terms of
conversation; attendees left with much to consider as each pursues
licensure. I am pleased to have been a
part of the panel; I am sure this is not an exact summary, but it is a start.
Best.