As a result of exhaustive research, I have concluded that the only people who hate the word “Intern” are interns. Big surprise there … glad I didn’t spend any money on market research to figure that out. If you are outside the field of architecture, I’m sure you couldn’t care one way or the other.
There is a lot of chatter going on within the architectural profession where the interns have picked up their mantles in an effort to have the intern label removed from their personal descriptor. The consensus among interns is that the word is demeaning and doesn’t actually represent their contribution to the office and to the practice of architecture. It isn’t unreasonable to think an intern would be far more knowledgeable than the licensed architect, sitting just a few feet over, in some of the various methods and technologies that architectural firms employ. I have first-hand experience of such a situation with one of the interns we had in the office this summer – John Charbonneau. John had the knowledge and command of certain software that allowed us to take on a very complicated project that otherwise, without John, we would not have been able to complete.
Before we go much further, let’s first define “intern”:
“The term intern refers to any individual in the process of satisfying a registration board’s experience requirements. This includes anyone not registered to practice architecture in a U.S. or Canadian jurisdiction, graduates from NAAB-accredited programs, architecture students who acquire acceptable experience prior to graduation, and other qualified individuals identified by a registration board.”
National Council of Architectural Registration Boards page 2
Well, that’s the very specific defintiion as provided by NCARB (National Council of Architectural Registration Boards) and according to the people who hate the word “intern”, NCARB is the devil – a completely unreasonable conclusion but in defference, let’s take a look at a more traditional entity that defines words … This from Merriam-Webster:
in·tern
noun \ˈin-ˌtərn\
: a student or recent graduate who works for a period of time at a job in order to get experience
: a person who works in a hospital in order to complete training as a doctor
Pretty straightforward really and between the two definitions, I think you can figure out that within an architectural context, this basically means that anyone with an architectural education who has not yet met the requirements (work experience and passing the registration tests) is labeled an “intern.” Only after you have met these requirements can you call yourself an “architect.”
If you ask most recent architecture school graduates “just how different is the real world from college?” almost every single one of them will acknowledge that there is a HUGE difference between the two. The period of time that occurs immediately after graduation is when most people realize that the real world of architecture bears only a passing resemblance to the things you did while you were in school. (re: The not-so-sexy side to Architecture). Good thing that “practice time is built in there, right?
There is a process to becoming an architect, and a fairly long one at that. You go to school for 5 to 7 years, you take the Architectural Registration Exam (which is actually 7 tests) and then you have to complete an internship period – the time when your education is supplemented by working in the real world on real projects, budgets, clients and gravity. The average time it takes for most applicants to complete the Intern Development Program (according to the 2007 Internship and Career Survey) and pass the Architectural Registration exam is 6.4 years. Add that together with the time spent getting your degree, the path to architectural licensure and the right to call yourself an “architect” is the longest of any licensed profession in the country.
Wow – sounds pretty sorry doesn’t it? No wonder these highly educated and (clearly) dedicated individuals don’t like being called an intern. I get it, I really do, but I’m not sure what I think of any alternate titles.
Do you know what an unlicensed lawyer is called before they become a lawyer? Probably all sorts of things but “Lawyer” isn’t one of them. How about an unlicensed doctor? (other than a shaman that is …) The answer to this question is part of the reason there is actual fuel for this fire. Immediately upon graduation for medical school a person can call themselves a doctor but they aren’t licensed to practice medicine. They are doctors only in name, at least from a legal standpoint, until they become licensed. To clarify, here is a breakdown:
- Medical Student: Student in a graduate-level medical program
- Resident: Medical school graduate undergoing on-the-job training
- Intern: First-year resident, usually not yet licensed to practice medicine
- Fellow: Residency graduate undergoing continued specialty training
- Physician or doctor: Person with medical degree; may or may not yet be licensed to practice medicine
Maybe I’m not reading the right medical journals but I haven’t heard a lot of squabble from medical students, residents, or medical interns over the names that the profession calls them … maybe they have other things to hold their attention. Right now I have 6 people in my office who all completed architecture school and have either passed the A.R.E. or are in the process of completing it. I don’t call any of them architects or interns as the title fits. They are Michael and Audrey, Ryan, Morgan and so forth. The only time anybody outside our office (i.e. clients) pays attention to the descriptor is when looking at the billing rate assigned to each level … and the only people who are labeled as “interns” are the folks who come in during the summer while on break from school; everyone else is either:
Principal Architect
Project Architect
Project Manager
Designer
There is no question that the architectural profession is slow to adapt to the changing marketplace and the perceptions of our profession. Fewer and fewer people are becoming architects and that’s a problem. I don’t really care for the argument that we are underpaid (How much does an architect make?) – that’s our fault, we can’t push that off on the ignorance of society for not recognizing how arduous the road or how long the journey; but there is clearly a disconnect between what we as a society demand of our architects compared to other professions. I also don’t really care about how long the process takes to become a licensed architect – other than the fact it is keeping people from actually becoming architects … which is a big problem for the industry. I knew the path was hard and long before I started so I don’t really complain about it after the fact. It didn’t “sneak” up on me and surprise me.
Since I like to think I am a man of the people (because I’m one of those people) I think its time that the architectural profession shift its focus away from business as usual and do what it can to attract new young people to the industry and increase its efforts to keep the ones we currently have. If that means protecting the word “Architect” across other industries then let’s do that. If unlicensed architectural graduates want a title that they think is less demeaning than “Intern” … give it to them. What ever it takes but do something other than meet and talk about it. I know that NCARB has assembled the “Future Title Task Force”, a team of 14 people from around the US (both licensed and unlicensed) that will meet in October 2014 to discuss an overall logic that will ideally determine what architects – before and after licensure – can call themselves, but who knows if they will actually be able to make a change – the individual states are the governing bodies that set that sort of regulation as I understand it.
In the meantime, if you are one of those “interns”, go get your license and take the solution into your own hands. If you are an architect, treat your unlicensed associates with respect and recognize their value to the office. All of us can be a part of the solution to this issue (which in my mind is less about what to call interns and more about how we can attract and keep our talent in the profession).
Best of luck, let me know your thoughts below, hopefully we can assemble enough information here to aid the Future Title Task Force.
Cheers,
There are a plenty of articles out there where people present their opinions on the use of the word “intern”. So particularly good ones are:
The Indicator: No More Interns by Guy Horton
The Great Intern Debate by Jared Banks
Stop Calling me “The Intern” by Benjamin Docktor
War of the Words by Brinn Miracle
The list of what each state calls their young professionals on the path to licensure, along with the accompanying article can be found on the AIA National site – AIArchitect.
Leave a Reply
I’m behind on my reading, so I’m just getting to this post. I went back to school to become an architect and therefore am an older “intern”. I have no problem calling myself that, when people mistake me for still being a college student, I’m flattered they think I look young!
But I will say, I disagree with all the stats about how there aren’t enough architects joining the profession. New graduates still can’t find a job. I’ve had a very difficult time finding a new position myself and face unemployment in the next two weeks.
Well written post on intern architects though, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
We don’t call them interns in Australia. We are work experience students if we are doing any work while studying. After our Bachelors degree we are an architect (although my school encourages us to think of ourselves this way throughout the degree). Then we do our master for 2 years and 2 years of experience before our registration exam and then we are a registered architect. Although when we first come out of the bachelors we are often just called a CAD monkey haha
In England, ever since my first summer job in an architects office following first year at uni, I have been called ‘Architectural Assistant’ or ‘Architectural Designer’. This is way better than ‘intern’. I have now got 3 years professional experience and in my current office am called ‘Part-2 Architectural Designer’ (showing I have all my uni qualifications but not the licensing – part 3). The title is on my business card and therefore clients and other consultants/engineers I work directly with can have confidence in my work, if it said ‘intern’ I don’t think they would.
Mr. Borson,
Interesting to hear you weigh in on the ‘issue’. I graduated from my undergraduate Architecture program in May of 2013, and started my FIRST full time position as an Intern Architect last week. After spending over a year bouncing around jobs in the construction industry, I am extremely excited and proud to call myself an Intern Architect. To me the term makes much more sense than something like ‘Architectural Designer’, as it indicates a job along a particular path, whereas other terms could be used by others who have no intent to become licensed.
My only complaint about the title is that several close friends have asked me about my ‘internship’. I hope to be licensed in the next five or six years, so it shouldn’t be an issue long for me.
-Calvin
I think there is some logic to your observation that Architectural Intern express some point along a path that concludes with licensure whereas Architectural Designer does not.
One of the reasons I wanted to finally write this post was that I wanted to hear from those that are in a position to be called an intern and what they thought about it. I will admit that I am surprised to read as many comments from people who bring up the number of times they A) are in a position to tell someone they are an architectural intern, B) that other people ask about their internship, and C) that people assume that an intern means you are working for free.
I never had any of those issues and I was an “intern” for 6 years. Wonder why this situation has changed? Or is it because I have white hair and people just assumed I was an architect…
The white hair totally helps. I think I may be one of the few women I know who would be so pleased at going gray!
There are so many sucky things in your comment … amazing.
I used to be slightly indifferent to other professions co-opting the word architect but over the last few years it has started to bother me with the ease at which others can call themselves an architect and those that are education and working towards licensure cannot. It makes my face hurt and I wish some of the effort going after interns using the word architect was directed towards other professions using the term.
Bob, I appreciated your response to my comment. I wanted to let you know that I am now an Architect and can confidently tell my brother to….well, [insert derogatory statement appropriate for a brother here]. 🙂
awesome – good for you! (for the “Architect”, not the telling your brother off)
This is a branding issues, not one of licensing, as the courts see the title “architect” as being generic, like “engineer”.
If the AIA is going to effectively be the “voice of the profession”, they need to find a creative way to establish (building) architects from all others.
I wish I could like that reply a million times.
I think the problem is that architects have nothing to do with the medical or legal industry. Architecture is experimental art and science. Doctor’s and lawyers don’t do experiments that is left up to more creative artists scientists and inventors.
I disagree with you – I know a great many doctors and lawyers who are incredibly creative and are working within known systems to develop new techniques, tools, processes, etc.
Good luck to you Simon an getting your license.
I did want to address the statement on how school doesn’t prepare you for work. I don’t think that teaching someone how to think or approach a problem is really the area of focus that most people intend when they say school doesn’t prepare you for work – it’s more about the more practical areas like professional practice, dampproofing, detailing a foundation, understanding how to process change orders and RFI’s, etc. How to think and solve problems is esoteric and any degree from college should be doing this.
I agree, but the variable is the subject matter and context of the thinking…And all those things – the more practical areas like professional practice, dampproofing, detailing a foundation, understanding how to process change orders and RFI’s, etc. – are why the IDP process is necessary.
I do not disagree with with your conclusion about the intention of those statements, however I believe an assertion that school does not include this subject matter implies a proposition that it should. I don’t mean to be argumentative, but given the intensity of an architectural education, where would that subject matter fit? And into what context? And at the expense of what other portion of that education. My point is simply that ‘internship’ is absolutely necessary and in so being, it is appropriate to call those participants interns.
At my firm, they affectionately refer to me as the “Baby-Architect” haha!
I don’t think its calling interns, “interns” that’s the biggest issue deterring people from pursuing a license. I think it has more to do with poorly managed expectations.
When you expect the 5 years in school to prepare you for what you will actually do when you get out and it kind of doesn’t, why wouldn’t you feel like throwing your hands in the air?…just the way I see it, anyway.
And I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you expected it to be hard. I think THAT is the difference between people who go for licensure and people who feel misled.
Great Post!
Drew Paul Bell,
Baby-Architect
I imagine some to the friction over titles comes from the same area; from outside the profession. Much as various IT trades have expropriated “architect” to mean all sorts of unlicensed endeavors, none of which involve buildings,, “intern” has a different connotation in “the rest of the world.” Out “there” the title “intern” refers to an unpaid position granted to a person of no defined skills, who is then “tested” through overwork and long hours.
My ‘money’ is on the Title Committee coming up with something original like “AIT” or “Architect In Training” to mirror the similar title the PE’s use.
“…Fewer and fewer people are becoming architects and that’s a problem…”
Is this true? Do you have any hard data about this? (No offense, I’m just curious!)
I can only speak for central europe, its somehow very frustrating bc there are actually too many architects at the market. As far as i know, there is no huge demand for architects, especially for young people the job prospects are therefore limited.
Moreover, the number of graduated architects is still increasing .
Maybe its just a EU thing…..was just wondering.
In the UK there is a phased approach to qualification as a fully Chartered Architect. After 3 years of university studies, you are a Part 1 graduate. You then complete 1 year of professional practise before starting your Masters programme. On completing your Masters and the 1 year pp, you are classed as a Part 2 graduate. Full chartership (also known as Part 3) takes a minimum of a Masters, 2 years professional practise, submission of a case study, oral and written evaluations and a final professional interview. A long-winded process which not all architects undergo but interesting and useful distinctions perhaps?
There is a couple firms in my town that call graduates – associate architect and reserve intern architect for those still in school. Which I feel is fair, am I in an internship right now or am I a working professional that is part of the industry?
One aspect that I did not hear discussed: Should there be a distinction between the still-in-school intern and the 5-10 year out professional who is finished with their IDP, manages projects, etc.? In my opinion, it is a bit misleading, confusing (and I suppose in some ways offensive to the professional) to give them the same title. I began designating “student” next to the word intern on my resume for the positions that I had while in school. Or, how do you answer the question, “so, when are you done with school”? Umm, 2008.
I just asked an intern-still in school- about this post and this is where the conversation went. He doesn’t mind intern but thinks he will once he graduates (although he works at least 40 hours now). At the same time he thinks it’s important to reserve the title ‘architect’ for licensed architects. I have no problem with ‘architectural designer’. My problem is with the non-architectural ‘systems architects’ and ‘solutions architects’ everywhere.
Actually, I see more and more job applications out there where IT companies are dropping the “solutions” and “systems” from the titles and just going with architect. There’s no doubt that “architect” is a sexy title (otherwise George Costanza would have picked something else). I don’t think we have done a good job of protecting our titles and our profession, but that’s a topic for another day.
I think a good step in the right direction is losing the “intern” title. On paper it makes a lot of sense, but in some ways, I feel like it’s part of a caste system and one of many things that’s making our profession look archaic.
When does this ever come up – this side by side comparison? Who introduces themselves as an intern? This is definitely not going to be popular but if you’re 10 years out of school, done with all your IDP, manages projects, etc. maybe being labeled as an intern is the incentive you need to finish the process and get your license. I really hate that argument and I have way more sympathy for the person right out of school that doesn’t like being called an intern than I do for the 40 year old who doesn’t like it. The label – regardless if it’s intern or something else – should exist at a high level of description. In school is one name, architectural graduate is something else, licensed architect as the final label. I am not in favor of multiple levels, or degrees of levels, associated with this perception issue.
Thanks, Bob. I know a lot more now than I did as a student intern 9 years ago (before grad school), so my initial comment was more related to reflecting experience level more so than the title itself. Honestly, I feel a bit bullied by your comment, but that has generally been my experience of how principals treat their employees.
I was worried that it would come off that way – I’m sorry. It would have been easier to temper the delivery in person than the “take 90 seconds and respond” approach that I generally can afford. I do have strong feelings about the people who go through all the hoops but don’t ever take the test and then feel slighted that they aren’t afforded all the same courtesies that the people who do complete the process enjoy. I do think that there is a stigma with the word intern that is associated with age – and by extension, a person’s experience. I hope that there is a word out there that can appease all groups of people but I am skeptical – somebody will feel cheated no matter what happens. Maybe I’m wrong (it’s happened many times before). And I’m sorry if my comment(s) came off aggressive towards you, I didn’t intend it.
Bob, I appreciate your perspective and blog. No worries. What about perceptions in adjacent industries? Lets say for example you have a dual degree (i.e. MBA, civil) with architecture. After a few years out of school you are seeking to “bridge the gap” and utilize both skill sets. Do you think the intern label could ever be a roadblock to such “crossover opportunities” (say in development or planning)? (That said, obviously ones success in finding these opportunities always comes down to a case-by-case of interviewing skills, network, intangibles, etc.) What do you think? Complete non-issue?
I don’t know if it’s a non-issue but it might be so specific that I’m not sure there is a roadmap in place that one could follow. The skill-set from one degree might influence and shape the other but I have ever run across someone who was actively using both at the same time.
My comment is in regards to fewer people becoming architects in conjunction with the amount of time needed to complete one’s IDP and the time/cost invested in taking all seven exams. The unfortunate reality is that our economy has not fully rebounded to pre-Recession levels. The sad reality is that it probably never will. How can students fulfill their IDP requirements when it’s soul-crushingly competitive to find jobs? I remember one instructor at my school (M.Arch) who decided to forgo licensure and chose to go the Interior Design route. Why? Because of the ridiculous fees and the glass ceiling no one wants to talk about. At the time I thought she was crazy but 10 years later, I understand now that at some point you want to stop fighting the system and just love your job and make a decent living. I love this field so much. I breathe it, sleep it, live it…but it can be very frustrating and disappointing.
it would be easy to make your comment its own post but in short, I agree with the premise that obtaining and maintaining your license is outrageous – especially compared to other fields (I wrote a post titled ‘The Costs Associated with Becoming an Architect’ – http://www.lifeofanarchitect.com/the-costs-associated-with-becoming-an-architect/ ) This is another aspect that our profession needs to address or we’ll all be made more irrelevant with each passing year as fewer and fewer people decide to follow this path.
I’m 46. I’d give anything to be an intern again
I’m 46 … what are you trying to say!?!
I’m wonderng if INTERN confuses people who are not in architecture because it brings up the image of unpaid coffee-fetching copy-makers in many other offices. In the interest of simplicity and consistency, I’d like to suggest the word STUDENT before educational requirements are completed in any field, and would use APPRENTICE for the first few years following graduation [even after any required examinations have been passed]. For anyone who objects to being labeled as new in their fields – when they are new – it might be time to get over it. No matter what skills you possess at age 22, 23, 24 etc, you are just starting out. It’s time to be humble, listen and learn.
Maybe I just need to accept the fact that people associate the word intern with “unpaid labor” … I don’t think I would have ever drawn that conclusion. In my mind, anybody who would be willing to work for free isn’t worth having.
I spent my time as a stay at home parent outside of the profession doing lots of free work / volunteering. The experience was immensely valuable and I am sure the feeling was mutual. To be quite honest some of my best experiences involved free work. I reentered the profession after a 2 1/2 year hiatus with a $10/hr bump in pay as a result.
Donating your time and working for free are not the same thing
As a recent graduate with a B.Arch degree, I admit I’m not particularly fond of the “intern” title. I look at it as more of a summer position, rather than a full-time position in an office. But as other comments have mentioned, within an office, most full-time employees are labeled as something other, and only part-timer’s and students are officially interns.
For NCARB’s purposes, I understand the need to define it clearly, and wouldn’t waste my time complaining about it. Furthermore, as Bob said, he knew what he was getting into before starting school. Well so did I, more or less. I didn’t know the length of time was fully, but I did know it was a long time to earn my license and I accepted it as a price for my dream.
If this is an important enough thing to address on a national level, I would suggest something similar to the medical profession’s hierarchy.
Let’s call summer temp’s and part time student employees: interns
Let’s call unlicensed degree holders: Residents or Resident architects
Licensed Architects can keep their titles, I think… most of the time.
this seems pretty reasonable to me, certainly better than “Architect-in-Training” … that sounds terrible.
I’m sure all of the Engineers-In-Training (E.I.T.’s) would sympathize. 🙂
Along with some of the previous comments (and sorry if I’m repeating anything someone else has already mentioned), I don’t mind the term “intern” or telling someone I’m an architectural intern or intern architect when they ask what I do for a living. But there’s usually a tedious conversation that follows that response because people outside the profession typically define the term “intern” as an unpaid job or position, so there’s a reaction of disbelief because they assume I’m working for no pay. It takes an additional sentence or two to help them understand the term intern in this profession essentially means unlicensed.
I think there is a big difference between telling someone in a conversation that you are an architect versus selling yourself and your services as if you were a licensed architect. I’m not giving any legal advice here, but 20 years ago, if I was at a neighborhood block party and somebody asked me what I did for a living I would have told them I am an architect. If someone was talking to me about designing them a new house, that’s a different story. I don’t think anybody would come after you for calling yourself an architect at a cocktail party, it’s when your selling work and pretending to be something your not that things get prickly.
I usually say that I work in an architectural firm. From what I learned in my legal class in grad school (specifically for the architects) is that technically we’re not supposed to tell anyone we’re an architect. Now whether or not anyone will pursue us on that from a cocktail party reference is another conversation. For my part, I don’t want to do anything to jeopardize licensing, so I usually do the tedious conversation route as well.
Hi Kat – thanks for the comment. One of the issues I have whenever non-licensed people make the argument that they know about x or y than one of their licensed compatriots. I say “So what?” Do you know more about everything than that licensed individual or is it possible that you spend time solving problems that the other person hasn’t had to deal with in years.
Part of the education process of any field – and particularly technology based fields – is that while younger people might understand the technical nuances better, they might not understand the flow as well, or why you would choose to solve a problem one way over another. Experience should allow you to see further down the path rather than the rock you are about to step on. Both have their value and place in the process but neither should be discounted.
I am not directing this comment at you, rather introducing a scenario worth considering to your example … there are always exceptions to every rule.
OH, this person is a true exception. When the rest of the managers would rather assign tasks to the interns (still in school and one just out [not me]) that tells you something. My direct super basically refuses to let him work on any of our projects.
And I absolutely agree with you on the knowledge front. I have learned an infinity from the other Architects here, and a couple are the reason I took this job; I worked here as a student and knew their knowledge was invaluable. But, this one person….oy vey. It makes me wonder if it’s worth all the effort some days, but I love my job (most days) and my projects.
I think the main thing is really that we need some way to distinguish student verses non-student (in the traditional sense, not that we don’t all continuously learn). I was talking to my psychiatrist friend earlier this week and she was asking me about where I was in the process. All the sudden she goes, “It’s like you’re a fellow!” and I said yes, and then she knew exactly where I was.
I don’t have a problem with the ‘intern’ tag. When I’m speaking to someone outside of the field, who would be confused by the term, I just say I work in an architecture office and I’m a project manager (I have friends who are ‘designers’ or ‘job captains’, etc). When it comes to speaking to peers or others within the field, it’s easy – I’m an intern architect who’s finished IDP and passed 6 of the 7 exams so far… just need to clear that last hurdle. Regardless of how long you’ve been in the field, (I’ve been working for more than 11 years on this), if you’re on the path to licensure, you’re an intern. IF you don’t like that term, there are ways around using “intern”, but you’re not an architect. If you’re not on that path and are content to just work in the field as a draftsman or project manager forever, then you’re not an intern either, so that solves that problem.
HI Mike – thanks for adding your perspective.
I don’t know why this term has become such a big deal in the last 2-3 years – it’s been around since 1866 (more evidence of my exhaustive research) and its meaning then is the same as its now. What I am most confused about is how and when people are called an intern. It’s one thing to be labeled an intern and it shows up on your employee review or in the space next to your name on the billing, but where else does it happen? As an example, I really, REALLY hate the word blogger and I am referred to as a blogger all the time. I hate it passionately but that what the entire world understands and so I just roll with it. What I can control is that I have never referred to myself as a blogger and I don’t call my blogger buddies “bloggers”.
I don’t think the entire world understand what “intern” means within our profession. I would argue that the majority of our world thinks of interns as being part time employees while still studying, or unpaid people working in exchange for experience. This is pervasive throughout colleges, with many companies who offer summer internships, with non-profits looking for summer laborers and in pop culture through television and films (The Internship with Owen Wilson for instance). None of these reflect what it means to be an Architectural Intern. I would argue that the only people who understand what an architectural intern is, are those within the profession.
Secondly, as alluded to in some comments above, if a firm owner wouldn’t put intern next to someone’s name on a proposal, or introduce their employee to a client as an intern, then why is it ok for our entire profession to call a large percentage of our members interns? I don’t think it helps us portray the value our education gives us.
BTW, I LOVED your post on the cost of being an architect. I think the licensure system is incredibly broken and we should all be pushing for major reforms.
In NCARB’s eyes I am still an intern.. I have worked in the profession almost 10 years, I have my masters, completed the IDP… 4 years ago?, and have a skill set and knowledge that can top some of my peers that are architects…
Therefor in the office I am called a project designer /project manager..
It is hard outside of the office to explain, that oh I am an “architect” but not really a real architect because I cant call myself one until I am licensed; but i do the same thing…. I guess i should get off my ass and finish my exams… in my free time..
Yes, you should get your license. I’m not sure how many people would point at the guy who has been working for years, is extremely knowledgeable, and say you are an “intern”. You might fall into that category according to NCARB’s definition but you knew that before you started this journey.
On a separate note, I think it’s incredibly important for people like you to set the example, pass the test and get your license. All the people out there who say they are knowledgeable and skill in the architectural arts due to their lengthy experience should have no problems passing the test. If the cost of the exam is an issue, how good at your job can you really be? There are also all sorts of continuing education requirements that people with licenses have to maintain that those without do not have to maintain.
I’m not speaking specifically about you here, Doug, just in general – but be the example and get this done.
My biggest issue with the title is NOT within the implied definition of the word ‘intern’. My biggest issue resides in having identical titles for two people that could be IMMENSELY different in experience, knowledge, and the like. An additional checkpoint would be enough to satisfy me. (Level 1: Intern — Level 2: ?? — Level 3: Architect.)
Who ever uses those terms – Level 1 Intern? Would you actually ever say “I am a level 1 Intern”? Those are labels associated with experience and skill levels and nothing else. Maybe I have been sheltered in the 10 or so architectural jobs I’ve had but does anyone actually have those sorts of labels on their business cards?
Our official “office titles” do have a level 1,2,3. I’m a 3, as high as you go. We elected not to put intern on my business cards because I was a lower level when I got them and this accommodated all levels, plus we didn’t really want the client to see intern because, as Brett said, it does not reflect my experience. I think we could benefit from a naming system with more than just “intern.”
He just means there would be an intermediate term. The level 1,2,3 he wrote was just a description, not an actual part of the title. The terms would be “intern, something, architect”.
i think he was just labeling his list bob. another confusion is the use of the word ‘associate’. i’ve had quite a few clients and people outside the profession ask if “Associate AIA” was higher than “AIA”.
One of the replacement terms being discussed is “Associate Architect” to better align ourselves with AIA membership levels. I know it creates challenges with some firm structures using Associate as a title within the company.
That brings in another level of conversation that I didn’t even touch on – the professional membership of the AIA. If you are a member of the AIA, but you are unlicensed, rather than intern you could be an associate – people have the option now.
And for those people that ask if Associate AIA is higher than AIA, if I was an associate, I would say “yes, it is”
it depends on the time of day sometimes… ‘intern’ in most industries, simply means college kid on summer vacation. the use of the “associate” title is the main reason my office pays for my aia membership. this way they can market me to clients as something more than an ‘intern’, a term that has no longer reflects on my 7 years of experience. (half-way through tests)
sound process thought through by your firm – I applaud them for dealing with this issue in an extremely simple manner.
I never had an issue being called an intern. I got tired of explaining the whole process, so I hurried up and got licensed fast…problem solved!
I think the main issue is that when most people hear the word “intern”, they think of a student working a temporary, potentially unpaid, summer or semester job during college (even Bob says no one in the office is labeled an intern except for the students there during their summer break!).
I agree, that within an office, no one calls each other architect or intern or designer or manager. But outside the office, when I told people I was an intern in an architecture firm, I was often asked if the position was going to lead to a full-time, paid position when I graduated. They were always surprised when I told them I had already graduated (after five years…), it was full-time position, I was salaried, and that I did a lot more than simply file drawings.
How about instead of saying that one’s an intern at an architecture firm, one simply says they work at an architecture firm…?
This past summer while on break from school, I took a job in a firm. As I’m not finished my master’s yet, I wasn’t considered an intern in the official sense, and when people asked what I did “I work at an architecture firm” was really the only appropriate response. For ease I will probably continue to say the same post-grad.
I never had the things you mention happen to me – but I never referred to myself as an intern. In addition, I would posit that only other architects are even aware of some of the ridiculous tactics that go on within architectural offices. Do people really know that there is a practice out there of not paying your “interns”? Ridiculous practice and one that no office I have ever worked at participated in. Not paying your employees should be a criminal activity.
I don’t mean interns in architecture offices not being paid. I’m talking about students who take unpaid summer internships in various fields (banking, accounting, media, etc.). The Economist website even had an article about unpaid interns this week, saying nearly half of internships in the USA are unpaid! But I agree, all employees,intern or not, should be paid.
It really should be against the law to allow unpaid internships.There should always be some sort of compensation whenever there is some two-way sort of exchange or products or services. If some person wants to sit in my office and just watch us do stuff – I won’t pay for that (but I wouldn’t let people do that so don’t ask) but if there is any work being done, time to break out the checkbook.
quite honestly I am getting a bit tired of this debate and really do not understand the fuss. The title of intern is an interim situation and not permanent, and has been with the profession for quite a long time. Get over it and take the exam and become registered. Just my two cents, and my opinion. I am sure others will lodge a disagreement, but that is okay. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and their rejoinder will not alter mine.
I would agree with you on this one, but if changing the name means appeases the masses that are leaving the profession then it’s time to make that change. I think it is a superficial change … but it seems baby steps are all this industry is capable of
Not everybody is looking towards licensure. I’m surprised this hasn’t come up yet. Although I’m not talking about myself, I see/hear people saying that licensure would not make them more useful within their current position (smaller firms). I see this as the minority, but it’s worth mentioning.
I agree with this. There are many people who might not be following a traditional path that requires licensure. Professors for instance. There is no reason for them to pursue licensure as it just adds unnecessary cost and burden without it being required for them to do their jobs well. Or Architects who go into the construction side or development side. I wish we would stop alienating people and start being a more inclusive profession.
Many colleges require that you be a licensed architect to be a professor.
Many universities might, but not all. I know many professors or adjunct faculty teaching design studios that aren’t licensed.
I would think obtaining your license in a smaller firm is more valuable than in a larger firm. At least it is in our office. We charge different hourly rates for licensed architects in our office and as a result, that means you (the licensed architect) get a pay raise.
I wish that was the case for me. I am at a small firm and they had no interest in me getting licensed and when I brought this up as one of my professional development goals 2 years ago rather than applauding my interest, their response was “well we aren’t going to pay you any more”. I have now become licensed and I did it all for myself – true to their word, they wasn’t a pay raise for me, but I now feel like I have more opportunities to go out and start my own practice when the time is right. I wish that more employers would see the benefit of having their staff become licensed.
“Theoretically” you get a pay raise, but in a small firm with all licensed architects, this is not always the case.
I work in a large firm. Licensure is important. Maybe no immediate pay raise, however the earnings potential is greater for those that show initiative and achievement.
Kerry, I agree with you. There has been a sad separation of what many consider design and architecture. We have promoted this when the AIA started to ignore the technical side of architecture and promoted unlicensed designers with awards, partnerships within firms, etc. The term “design firm” has originated and there is not the need for licenses since they hire an AOR or get the client to hire the AOR. The term intern is a byproduct of this. Even today partners in large firms are not licensed. They usually are the designers. They contend that other people do what we call “technical architecture”. Many think that is the responsibility of the contractor. You and I know differently. Architects sign drawings. Designers don’t.
Being in my second year in an architectural college, I would kinda like to be called “intern” if it meant actually working in an architecture firm. Nothing is better or more important than real-life experience. As John Wayne said in The Cowboys, “…cuz out there, that’s when school really begins!”
I don’t really understand the aversion to the term intern – it seemed like it was a positive milestone along the journey to becoming an architect. Besides, I haven’t ever referred to a person in the office as “the intern”, like it’s a label … I tend to use their names.
Cue the boomer posts, “When I was your age I took my title that was given to me and I felt lucky to have it… The problem today is all these “participation trophy kids” thinking the world owes them something… Here, take your pittance salary and get back to work so I can finish writing out my bonus check” In 3… 2… 1…
In all serious though I appreciate your willingness to entertain the idea of allowing unlicensed folks to escape out from under the word intern. If it makes it easier for people to go about their day or feel valued in the profession then it’s something we should pursue. However, it is only the “tip of the iceberg”. How is the profession positioning itself for relevancy in an industry that increasingly marginalizes the role of the architect? That seems to be a bigger obstacle for the future than titles.
I would tend to agree – the profession is stagnating and time and time again architects are marginalizing themselves in an effort to compete against other architects (and non-architects). I don’t know if this is a more damning statement regarding our future or about our past, but we aren’t helping ourselves with fighting within the profession … it’s time to focus our efforts outward.
So true. This is why I’m under the belief we should allow more people (perhaps everyone with a degree?) to call themselves architects. We need to have architects engage the public and be more active throughout society. I say Licensed Architects are required to stamp drawings but Architects are those who have studied architecture, practice architecture, teach architecture, design buildings. I want Architects to serve in congress, I want architects who become middle school teachers, I want architects to conduct research, I want architects to help build our buildings, I want architects to develop our buildings, neighborhoods and cities. I think that limiting the use of the term Architect within our own ranks only marginalizes our profession. Besides, there are software architects, and campaign architects, and hair architects, yet some of our brightest and future members are forbidden from using that word, many of whom go on to other careers and paths through life.