National Associates Committee

My IDP experience was fairly neutral. In persuing my professional interests with vigor I was able to complete the program within 3 years.

My IDP experience would have been better if I felt it had a direct consequence on my licensure. IDP remains a hoop to jump through, but is not used as a means to quantify a ARE's candidate's capabilities. The exam remains a task to see who can memorize the most information and follow the directions best.

If I were in charge and could make any changes, I would begin an evolution of IDP into a means in which to GRANT licensure. Standardized tests cannot evaluate the performance and skills of an architect in the 21st Century. Extend IDP to a 5 year program, intensify the tracking of hours WITH ACCOUNTABILITY. Develop the mentoring component as an unbiased means to evaluate the individual's qualifications for licensure. Then eliminate the ARE.

My IDP experience was good for the most part. I kept myself on top of units and hours and made sure I was getting the experience I needed in each category. I was able to get through IDP in 2.5 years. It would have been nice if someone was constantly asking me if I was where I needed to be, though.

My IDP experience would have been better if I could have taken the ARE concurrent with IDP. I know this is now in process and I am happy it is set up this way. Reporting would have been nice if could have been online.

If I were in charge and could make changes, I would eliminate the multiple choice exams and replace them with more drawing based exams. The multiple choice portions of the ARE test a persons ablility to memorize and guess at wrong answers vs. challenging them on what they know. Some canidates go in and don't study at all for the test (guessing at the questions) and pass, while others study for the exam and don't pass because they are not good test takers. There needs to be more of a comprehensive exam that challenges what you know based off of what you memorized and forget after you take the exam. I agree with the posted comment above about expanding IDP and develop a mentoring based internship and eliminate portions of the ARE. I believe the multiple choice tests are based on luck and not actually knowledge one has.

My IDP experience is satisfactory so far. It's difficult to find the time in a day-to-day work schedule to stay on top of recording and reporting units.

My IDP experience would be better if my firm was more involved in the process and culture of internship. I give them some credit for the overall firm culture, but there is room for improvement with regard to principals' and managers' knowledge about the process and it's importance.

If I were in charge and could make any changes, I would require that firms must have a comprehensive IDP/internship plan in place (similar to how businesses must have comprehensive safety plans) in order to maintain their firm registration. I would also require that the local and/or AIA chapters audit the IDP supervisors and mentors overseeing an intern.

I agree with JZ.
My IDP experience was too easy. I was able to creatively complete all my units rather than actually learn the material. In my own experiences I am almost done with my exams and getting my butt kicked by the extra responsibility I am expected to handle at work.
My IDP experience would have been better if I had realized that I needed way more experience and I should have taken my IDP more seriously as well as have my supervisor's and mentor's truely question my experience. Now taking my tests I realize the importance of training units I finished 2 years ago, so in favor of ARE timing a direct correlation could be made.
If I were in charge and could make any changes, I would say that the IDP process needs to be of a better quality where both the intern and the supervisor are able to make the experience as qualitative and quantitative as possible to make sure the intern is REALLY knowledgable enough and prepared to be an ARCHITECT. Especially with ARE timing that even though I am in favor of it, I do see a negative backlash of being able to produce less experienced architects. Therefore it is even more important that they actually learned something during their internship rather than just get by.

My IDP experience was frustrating, due to a lack of information available to graduates of architecture school programs. Not to mention the fact that NCARB lost, yes lost my complete file. (Luckily for them, and me, they found it.)
My IDP experience would have been better if my college had made IDP information more available to students. It also would have been better had there been a “database” of mentors, so that I wouldn’t have to call around trying to find one. And of course the obvious, it would have been better had NCARB not lost my file, due to what I perceived to be, lack of staff.
If I were in charge and could make any change I wanted, it would be to get NCARB, the AIA and architectural schools to work more closely together to provide graduates with the information and resources they need.
They come out school all fired up about starting their professional life only to get beat down by the lack of information and a stubborn bureaucracy (NCARB).