Licensing: A Basic
Policy
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes that persons who practice architecture must be licensed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
Explanation. Licensure is based on minimum standards
of competency relative to education, experience, and examination to ensure that
the public interest is served. Occupational Professional
licensure is an exercise of the state's inherent police power to protect the
health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. Five generally-accepted criteria
indicate when licensure is appropriate:
(1) unregulated practice of the profession occupation
poses a serious risk to a consumer’s life, the public health,
safety, or economic well being and welfare and the potential for
harm is recognizable and likely to occur; (2) the practice of the occupation
profession requires a high degree of skill, knowledge, and training; (3)
the functions and responsibilities of the practitioner require independent
judgment and the members of the occupational professional group
practice independently; (4) the scope-of-practice of the occupation licensed profession
is distinguishable from other licensed and unlicensed occupations; (5)
the economic impact on the public of regulating this occupational professional
group is justified. The practice of architecture meets these classic criteria.
This policy provides the basis for all Institute public policies relating to licensing and is part of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Explanation of
Licensing Committee Revision Recommendations:
The committee recommended minor revisions. These changes reflect the current vernacular used in licensing proposals by legislatures and regulatory bodies. The changes are considered minor because they do not effect the intent of the original policy.
Licensing: Accredited
Degree Programs
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes in a national system for accreditation of professional degree programs in architecture, including minimum educational criteria for licensure.
Explanation. Accreditation is the process of approving those professional degree programs that provide students with an appropriate educational
foundation for the practice of architecture. An accreditation process must consider a program's ability to produce graduates with the skills, knowledge, and judgment required for architectural practice beyond initial licensing. While focusing on the areas of public health, safety, and welfare, architectural education should develop a heightened sense of design excellence and of social responsibility; foster the ability to identify and solve new problems of emerging needs; and provide a basis for lifelong learning.
Accreditation assesses a program against established criteria, and provides periodic objective evaluation in view of the changes in and growing complexities of architectural practice.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes that single discipline architectural licensing boards, composed of public members and a majority of resident architects with staggered terms, should regulate the practice of architecture.
Explanation. The public health, safety, and welfare
is best protected by a licensing board composed of architects and public
members selected on the basis of qualifications and familiarity with design and
construction. Judging the qualifications, competence, and conduct of candidates
and licensees is a technical function that requires a majority of architects on
the board and cannot be competently performed by public members. The architects
should be appointed from among candidates recommended or , nominated, or
reviewed by the profession. The terms of office should
be of a predetermined number
of years and be staggered
to provide continuity. Serving at the will of the appointing authority is
inappropriate.
Public members may prevent boards from focusing only on narrow parochial concerns, help increase public and state officials' awareness of architects and architecture, help confirm the purpose of architectural licensing, and enhance the credibility of the licensing boards.
This policy is one of a group of integrated public
policies on licensing issues.
Position. The AIA strongly supports
the concept of individual boards to license architects. ;
however, licensing procedures for design professionals vary across the nation.
In some states, architects are licensed and regulated by boards concerned only
with architects; in other states, the licensing board regulates both architects
and engineers; in still other states, a single board may license and regulate
architects, engineers, contractors, geologists, interior designers, landscape
architects, and practitioners of other related disciplines. Separate
boards, statutes, and staff prevent the dominance of one profession, encourage
more attention to the unique problems and needs of the
public related to that profession.practitioners and
consumers, and lead to stronger consensus. In those states with boards that
license and regulate other design and
construction professions, the profession must
advocate adequate representation on the board and attention to the problems and
needs of consumers and practitioners of architectural services. Furthermore,
the profession should advocate that a combination board be limited only to
architects, other professionals involved in designing the built environment,
and public members. In situations
where a single board is not statutorily permitted, measures should
be taken to ensure that only architects and the appropriate
percentage of public members act on architectural
issues.
As the professional association representing
architects, the AIA state component is the appropriate body to nominate
or recommend qualified professional members with the experience,
dedication, and sensitivity to protect the
public.practice issues and concerns on a statewide basis. Public members should
demonstrate an interest in and a familiarity with the profession and the
design and construction industry in order to represent
client and user concerns. The components are encouraged to work
with the appointing authorities to develop criteria for selecting all members
of architectural licensing boards.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on
licensing issues.
Explanation of
Licensing Committee Recommendations:
The committee recommended revisions to the policy statement. The recommendation was made for the reason that staggered terms are desirable because they provide continuity on the board and help to preserve institutional knowledge. The committee also made recommendations to eliminate some of what it deemed as unnecessary verbiage. Finally, the committee recommended “word smithing” portions of the policy to accurately reflect current vernacular pertaining to licensure.
Licensing:
Enforcement
Statement. The American Institute of Architects advocates vigorous enforcement of architectural licensing laws by the states and recommends that penalties be assessed for unlicensed practice as well as for incompetent or improper practice by licensees.
Explanation.
Adequate enforcement of licensing statutes laws is essential to
ensure the protection of public
health, safety, and welfare. Historically, in most states, there
has been very little inadequate
enforcement of licensing laws, rules, and regulations
statutes. States have the responsibility to provide a mechanism with
adequate funding to investigate consumer complaints, to revoke
or suspend licenses impose fines and penalties for violations of
architectural licensing laws and for the practice of architecture without a
license, to hold administrative hearings
ensuring due process,to
initiate actions for injunctions, and to bring forward civil or criminal charges to the
proper authorities. States should also offer the architectural
professional associations the opportunity to provide technical
assistance.
Adequate enforcement of licensing laws requires the following:
·
Clear and legally appropriate language in the laws
statutes and governing rules.
· Clear administrative, enforcement, and judicial procedures.
· Increased understanding, among legislative and enforcement authorities, of the impact of unlicensed activity on the public health, safety, and welfare.
· Sufficient funding for the full operation of the Board, including investigation and enforcement.
· Increased public awareness of avenues for consumer redress.
·
Higher level of prosecutorial
activity.
· An obligation by the licensing board to initiate and pursue investigations.
·
Willingness Obligation of practitioners
to report, document, and testify on complaints.
· Active involvement of AIA state components in monitoring enforcement and providing technical assistance.
· A mechanism that offers the power to enjoin violations.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Explanation of Licensing Committee
Recommendations:
The committee recommended minor revisions to the policy explanation. The committee felt that the current explanation did not present enough detail and in certain circumstances used improper terminology. The committee also recommended the addition of 2 bullet points to the statement. The first bullet point reflects the importance and obligation of licensing boards to initiate and pursue investigations. The second bullet point underlines the need for language that offers the ability to legally stop activities that constitute unlicensed practice.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects
believes that there are significant differences between the practices of
architecture and engineering that affect public health, safety, and welfare and
that each professionals in either discipline should
practice the other discipline only to the extent that they are qualified and to
the extent that it is incidental to that their work
on that each
project.
Explanation. Architects and engineers have specifically
differenting
qualifications based on licensing standards for education, training, experience
and examination. Architects are particularly qualified to provide professional
services concerning patterns of human habitation and use, accommodation of
physical and social functions, aesthetics, and the coordination and design of
construction systems and building components.
The architect's education and training is one of diversity,
which encompasses the impact of design and technology on the health and
well-being of the public and on the built and natural environments. In
contrast, the licensed engineer's education, training, and examination are
within a specific area of expertise. and demonstrate the ability to function
as a specialist dealing with narrowly focused building technologies.
In limited situations, the areas of qualifications and practice of the two disciplines overlap; under those specific conditions, the incidental practice of one profession by the other may be justified. However, overlap and incidental practice should not be viewed as exemptions and opportunities to participate in the practice of another profession.
Increasingly, licensing boards are being asked to
define incidental practice and the areas of overlap of the two professions as a
guide in enforcement. Such efforts should not undermine the principles of professional
integrity and judgment that guide practitioners in the practice of their own
profession.
This policy is one of a group of integrated public policies on licensing issues.
Explanation of
Licensing Committee Recommendations:
The committee recommended minor revisions to the policy statement to provide additional clarity. The Committee recommends amending the title to clarify that the policy language should only apply to engineers who are properly trained in building systems or structures. Because of the “catchall” nature of engineering licensing in a majority of U.S. jurisdictions, the Committee believes that this change represents an important distinction. The committee also felt that changes were needed in the explanation. The committee believes that the term “narrowly focused” is somewhat demeaning to engineers and thus recommends its removal. In addition, the committee feels that the paragraph on “incidental practice” should be eliminated
Licensing:
Professional Education
Statement. The American Institute of Architects
believes the requirement of a professional degree from a National Architectural
Accrediting Board -accredited
program or its equivalent should be a prerequisite for licensing. The
equivalent must be a fair and equitable alternative. In addition, the AIA
believes that alternate experiences to the accredited degree or
its equivalent should be considered as fulfilling
educational and experience prerequisites to
licensure on an individual candidate basis.
Explanation. Education, experience, and examination
are related prerequisites for licensing and for practice.,
although eEach must be fulfilled justified
independently as elements of a licensing system. One element
cannot serve as an adequate substitute for another.
Professional architectural education provides exposure to a
foundation of knowledge,
particularly in design, that is difficult to duplicate by other means. It is also acknowledged that a
substantial majority of The AIA strongly encourages
candidates for licensing will have to earned a
professional degree from an accredited architectural program.
However, restricting the route to licensure to a single process can limit the opportunity of persons who may be fully qualified and unfairly restrict their access to the practice of architecture. There is a continuing need for an equivalency evaluation process.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Explanation of
Licensing Committee Recommendations:
The committee recommended minor revisions to the policy statement in order to provide greater clarity. The committee also recommended several minor revisions in the explanation section to strengthen the policy’s provisions and to more accurately reflect intent of the policy.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects holds that in the building industry the design responsibility for the public health, safety, and welfare demands the education and experience required for the licensing of architects and engineers. The AIA opposes any dilution of this responsibility.
Explanation. The sole basis for licensing, which regulates the practice of professionals, should be the protection of the public. Statutes governing the practice of building design by architects and engineers have existed in all 50 states for many years. Elements of building design that affect public health, safety, and welfare and that are within the scope of architectural practice, require the certification of minimum training and experience found only in that required for licensing as an architect. In addition, fragmentation of responsibility for the building design process will pose burdensome jurisdictional questions and may mislead the public as to respective areas of competence in the design professions.
Over the years, efforts have been made by some segments of the design and construction industry to seek legislation regulating the practice of specialized disciplines, which could lead to fragmentation of design responsibility.
As a national organization, the American Institute of Architects has opposed such efforts in the past only to the extent of ensuring that the prerogative of architects to practice all facets of the profession is not affected. With this policy, and in the public interest, the American Institute of Architects opposes practice regulation of individuals or groups other than architects and engineers in the building design profession.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Board Approval - March 1989
Statement. The American Institute of Architects recognizes that it may be in the public interest to reserve the use of specific titles for specialized design disciplines in the building industry through title registration. The discipline must be clearly defined and not in conflict with the discipline of architecture, and standards of professional conduct must be established. Qualifications for title registration should be based on an appropriate combination of education, experience, and examination. Title registration must not preclude the prerogative of architects to use the titles, where fitting, in providing architectural services. In addition, the AIA opposes granting titles to individuals through grandfather clauses. When grandfathering is required by law, strict and equivalent education, training, and testing criteria should be applied. The AIA also believes that use of a seal should not be granted to disciplines under title registration.
Explanation. Protection of titles is intended to assure the public that the person using the title has specialized education and precise, practical training combined with an examination specific to the discipline as follows:
• A four-year minimum professional degree or its equivalent;
• A structured internship with qualitative as well as quantitative criteria; and
• An examination that is task-related, focused on public safety, and validated by recognized testing agencies.
Systems of education, experience, and
examination, to ensure minimum levels of competency, must be established in
advance for any specialized disciplines seeking title registration.
To ensure minimum levels of competency and to provide for
continued protection of public health, safety, and welfare, systems of
education, experience, and examination, must be established in advance for any
specialized disciplines seeking title registration.
In providing architectural services, architects use titles that may be reserved for specialized disciplines. This registration legislation must not limit architects' use of those titles.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Explanation of
Licensing Committees recommendation:
The committee recommended the addition of language to emphasis the importance of providing protection of public health, safety, and welfare in title registration law. The committee believes that existing systems of training must be in place and at an adequate level prior to granting state recognition of an occupation or profession in the form of title registration or certification.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects
believes that an architect should be permitted to practice within a corporate
structure as long as an architect retains direct supervisory responsible
control and individual responsibility for performing architectural services.
Explanation. Under all architectural licensing
statutes it is the individual practitioner who is licensed to practice
architecture and not the firm or corporation. By preparing and signing the
documents, the licensee assumes professional responsibility for the
architectural work. Any laws allowing corporate practice should clearly specify
that the architect performing or in responsible charge control of the
professional services be identified and that the corporate business structure
shall not be used to shield unlicensed practice or shield the practitioner from
professional liability.
Many state architectural licensing laws place restrictions
on corporate practice that may prohibit business, and/or professional
corporations, or and may limit the number of non-architects that
may own stock in a corporation and/or serve on the Board of Directors.
These limitations are meant to ensure the integrity of architectural practice.
Restricting the opportunity of an architect to form or join a business
corporation is unnecessary as long as the architect maintains supervisory
responsible control and responsibility for over
professional activities.
This policy is one of a group of integrated public policies on licensing issues.
Licensing: Exemptions
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes that it is in the public interest for architects to design all structures intended for human habitation or use.
Explanation. The fundamental purpose of an architectural licensing law is to ensure that buildings occupied and used by the public have been designed by architects to protect public health, safety, and welfare. These laws also prevent misrepresentation by limiting the use of the title "architect." Every exemption, whether defined in terms of exempt structures or exempt activities, reduces the effectiveness of a licensing law. A licensing law with extensive exemptions essentially protects only the title "architect" and does not provide the public with adequate protection.
The Each state has a responsibility to its
citizens to ensure that structures used or occupied by the public have been
designed by qualified professionals architects. Exemptions for
simple farm/single-family structures may allow users to plan buildings when
they are adequately covered by building codes Traditional exemptions for
limited structures may be appropriate.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Board Approved –
December 1991
Explanation of
Licensing Committees recommendation:
The Committee recommended minor revisions to the explanation. The Committee considered the language naming specific exemptions too broad and suggested generic language to limit the size and type of structure that should be considered for exemption.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes that for the protection of the public the use of the term architect and its derivative forms should be reserved to those individuals licensed as architects.
Explanation. The title architect and its derivatives imply to the public that the individuals using those terms have met specific requirements of education, training, and examination established by state licensing boards. Use of such terms by unlicensed individuals is misleading the public.
Historically, all architectural licensing boards have restricted use of the title architect and its derivatives to those professionals who have been licensed to protect the health welfare and safety of the public.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Board Approved –
December 1991
Licensing Committee
Recommendation:
Adopt without revision. However, committee members expressed concern over the frequent use of the term “architect” by technology sectors and related fields. Particularly troubling are certification programs offered by several information technology companies. Successful completion of such courses allows an individual to advertise oneself as a “certified internet architect.” The use of the term “certified” in conjunction with architect is misleading and potentially confusing to the public. Furthermore, under the existing architectural statutes of all states, the term “architect”, and its derivatives, is a protected title and can be used only by licensed architects. The Licensing Committee members would like to know how state components view this issue. Could you please include your comments in your response.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes
that completion of the Institute's Continuing Education System (CES) standard
should be accepted as fulfilling any state-mandated continuing education
requirement. The American Institute of Architects supports mandatory
continuing education for licensure. To that end, all licensed architects should
be required to maintain a professional standard of competence and pursue
lifelong education and continuing education programs that supplement their
active practice. Compliance with the requirements of the AIA’s Continuing Education
System (CES) should be accepted as fulfilling any state-mandated
continuing education conditions.
Explanation. The AIA advocates a Mandatory Continuing Education requirement for relicensure. Each state should mandate a minimal amount of continuing education training for all licensed architects as a condition for licensure renewal. It is also essential that any state considering continuing education for re-licensure accept the AIA CES as a means of fulfilling the state's requirement.
The
AIA's CES program reflects the Institute's and the profession's commitment to
lifelong learning. The CES is a
rigorous, qualitatively based program that is the result of five years of study
and testing and that responds to the most recent research on professional learning. In addition, the program exceeds the minimum
standards for licensure by requiring self-directed study in areas beyond
health, safety, and welfare. Both of these elements help ensure that
participants in the CES are engaging in meaningful learning experiences that
are relevant to individual interests and needs and that contribute to
professional growth.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Explanation of
Licensing Committee Recommendation:
The Committee recommends that the AIA take a more proactive stance on continuing education.
Statement.
The American Institute of Architects believes that the practice of
architecture, for purposes of the licensing statute, should be defined as follows:
performing, offering to perform, providing consultation and advice to
clients concerning, or directly supervising the performance of certain
services, hereafter described, requiring the training and education of an
architect in the analysis, project process, art, visual perception, aesthetics,
judgment, and communication used to synthesize building structural,
environmental control, life safety, and construction material assemblies and
systems in building design, in compliance with the requirements of site design,
program, project economics, zoning restrictions, building code, and
barrier-free design. Such services are provided in connection with the design,
construction, enlargement, or alteration of a building or group of buildings,
and the space within and the site surrounding such buildings, that have as
their principal purpose human occupancy, habitation, or use.
The
AIA further believes that the services that require an architect shall include
the following:
1. Verification of facility
requirements and site development master planning.
2. Planning for facility use or reuse
and an evaluation of building structural, environmental control, life safety
and other requirements.
Life safety features in buildings include regulatory
building code provisions which provide comprehensive safety features to
eliminate, reduce or control life or health threatening situations in
buildings. Examples of life safety features include, but are not limited to:
compliance with occupancy classification requirements; compliance with
construction classification requirements; means of egress; fire-rated
construction assemblies; compliance with interior finish requirements; fire
detection, alarm and suppression systems; compliance with environmental health
regulations and smoke control systems. In addition, life safety features
include compliance with the minimum requirements for the following
environmental and habitability systems: heating and cooling; natural and
artificial illumination; natural and artificial ventilation; physical hygiene;
and accessibility from environmental barriers.
3. Design, from initial studies through
construction documents, including the design of engineering systems incidental
to the practice of architecture, and preparation of drawings, specifications,
and other instruments of service.
4. Coordination and integration of
engineering services, special consultant services, environmental systems, and building commissioning.
5. Preparation of documents for review
and approval by government agencies.
6. Construction contract administration
including but not limited to review of shop drawings and other related
submittals, issuance of clarification documents and change orders,
certification of payment requests, visits to the project site and other tasks
required to determine if work is generally proceeding in accordance with the
contract documents.
The
AIA believes that other services that are performed by architects, but which
may also be performed by others, should also be included in the definition of
the practice of architecture; such services include, but are not limited to,
development of facility programs, environmental and cost analyses, site
selection, feasibility studies, assisting in the bidding and negotiation of
construction contracts, design-build and construction management.
Rendering or offering to render those services, hereinafter described, in connection with the design and construction, enlargement or alteration of a building or group of buildings and the space surrounding such buildings which are integral to a community or will have human occupancy or habitation; the services referred to include pre-design services, programming, planning, providing designs, drawings, specifications and other technical submissions, the administration of construction contracts, and the coordination of any elements of technical submissions prepared by others including, as appropriate and without limitation, consulting engineers and landscape architects; provided that the practice of architecture shall not include the practice of engineering, but a registered architect may perform such engineering work as is incidental to the practice of architecture.
Explanation. A definition of architectural practice that delineates the scope of activities over which the state has regulatory control is fundamental to the licensing system.
Licensing laws should regulate the practice of architecture in a broad sense and not simply regulate architects. A definition of architectural practice should serve four purposes:
(1) It should provide a basis for regulating the activities engaged in by licensees and non-licensees and their performance.
(2) It should provide a basis for examining candidates for licensing and for evaluating the relevance of the education and experience of candidates for licensing.
(3) It should define specific services or activities that must be performed by licensees in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare.
(4) It should define services that architects may perform but which might also be performed by others.
The definition suggested above is the minimum essential to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Explanation
of Licensing Committee
Recommendation:
The Committee recommended extensive revision. The Committee opined that the language used in the current policy statement is too specific, the policy is overly long, and the statement is convoluted. Furthermore, because of the specific description of the activities that entail architectural practice, the definition could actually result in limitations on what constitutes architectural practice. The revised statement accurately reflects the provisions recommended by NCARB in their model architectural practice law. By using a more general definition of practice it is the Committee’s opinion that a greater range of architectural services fall under the definition’s broad description.
.
Statement. The American Institute
of Architects believes that all architects should maintain a professional
standard of competence and, therefore, supports lifelong education and
continuing education programs supplementing active practice.
Explanation. Public interest and
consumer groups have expressed concern over whether the skills acquired at the
beginning of a professional career are still adequate years later in a more
complex environment, and this concern has led to continuing education
requirements for some professions. Professional development activities
contribute to the maintenance of the skills required to practice but are not
substitutes for actual practice. The practice of architecture is closely
regulated through licensing laws, building codes, national and industry
standards for products and performance, regulatory agencies, and a judicial
system that demands high standards of professional care. Any individual who is
actively engaged in practice is subject to these forms of regulation and to the
competitive demands of the marketplace, which requires knowledge of current
methods, techniques, and materials of
construction. Exposure to new areas of business, practice, and design
technology is best achieved through voluntary selection and participation in
professional development activities.
This policy is one of an integrated
group of policies on licensing issues.
Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes it has the responsibility to participate in the establishment of legislative standards for licensing, monitor the National Council of Architectural Registration
Boards (NCARB) activities, and advocate the interests of the architectural profession on those issues being considered by NCARB.
Explanation. NCARB, as a federation of state regulatory agencies, has a substantial influence on the practice of architecture. As a professional organization, the AIA is obligated to protect the interests of the profession as well as the public interest. Although the licensing of architects is the responsibility of the individual states, NCARB plays a major role in regulating the profession through the development of licensing, enforcement, and legislative guidelines and standards. To be an effective advocate for the profession, the AIA must participate fully in NCARB's standard-setting processes and must monitor and take appropriate action on all of NCARB's initiatives that affect licensing, reciprocity, and the practice of architecture.
Originally conceived as an organization charged with aiding reciprocal licensing, NCARB has expanded its role to include involvement in almost all aspects of architectural practice. As NCARB has become increasingly involved in areas previously considered the domain of the professional societies, there have been instances of major policy differences between the two organizations. It is important that the AIA and NCARB work together and maintain a continuing dialogue on issues of common concern. It is equally important that their separate responsibilities and objectives be recognized and maintained.
This policy is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
‘
Policy Statement. The American Institute of Architects believes a comprehensive internship with measurable qualitative training criteria as well as a minimum three-year duration should be a requirement for licensure.
Explanation. Internship complements formal education as preparation for licensing and architectural practice. Evaluation of internship should be based upon mastery of certain practice skills and judgment in addition to a reasonable minimum required duration of internship.
An internship program based on defined learning objectives ensures that the intern has been exposed to many areas of practice and has achieved essential basic competencies required for practice. Training guidelines or learning objectives developed for internship should identify the minimum core abilities an intern should acquire during the training period to provide the foundation for practice in a diversity of settings.
The AIA recognizes that it is a fundamental obligation of its members to provide mentorship and support.
This is one of an integrated group of policies on licensing issues.
Board Approval - May 1996
The Committee supports the addition of language to emphasis the important role that mentoring serves in the intern training process.
Position
Statement:
The
Intern Development Program
The
AIA supports the Intern Development Program (IDP) and believes that the IDP
training areas provide interns with the diverse training and experience in
architectural practice that is an essential part of preparation for licensure.
The IDP program was established jointly by the AIA and the National Council of
Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) to provide qualitative content to
internship and to provide guidance to interns and their employers to ensure
meaningful training experiences.
Originally conceived as a voluntary
program, IDP is now mandated in the majority of the states and will shortly
become mandatory for the NCARB Certificate, which is required for reciprocity
in many states. As IDP has evolved, concerns have been expressed over the
inflexibility of the program's requirements, particularly with regard to
duration and practice setting restrictions. Interns have also expressed concern
with the difficulty of the record-keeping process and its attendant costs.
In 1995, the AIA convened a task force
charged with examining both education and internship standards for licensure.
The Task Force on Education and Internship Standards for Licensure examined the
IDP program and surveyed interns who had completed or were currently enrolled
in the IDP program. As a result of that work, the task force recommended, and
the AIA Board approved, the following positions regarding IDP:
1)
The AIA advocates a change in the governance of IDP to establish a
collaborative standard-setting body that includes representatives of NCARB, the
AIA, the American Institute of Architecture Students, and the Association of
Collegiate Schools of Architecture. Since IDP is now a requirement for
licensure, the governance of and the standard-setting process for the program
should follow appropriate legal guidelines to ensure that all affected parties
are participants in the process.
2)
The AIA advocates a change in IDP to refocus the program on the mastery
of learning objectives rather than on duration of time spent in individual
training areas. The training areas outlined within the IDP program have broad
support. The AIA believes, however, that the standard within each area should
be the attainment of specific core competencies rather than time spent. This
approach would ensure that interns achieve the competencies necessary for
practice and, at the same time, would provide greater opportunity and
flexibility for interns participating in a variety of practice settings.
3) The AIA believes that the cost of IDP
to the intern should be reduced significantly. The change to a learning
objectives-based system should be designed to simplify the program
administration and record keeping. In addition, alternative record keeping
options should be accepted for licensure.
Board
Approval - May 1996
Licensing Committee Recommendation:
Sunset