Internally Yours: Your AIBC Intern Architect Rep to Council Blog

"Grandfathers"

Just finished some morning studying.

So if the AIBC can sets educational requirements on interns and foreign-registered / broadly experienced architects - i.e. the certification of non-accredited architectural degrees, the completion of NCARB exams, the Oral Review - applying to become an architect,

coming from a standpoint of protecting the public interest, on what basis can existing MAIBCs, who have not completed these current standards of entry into the profession, remain practising architects? On what basis can a self-governing and self-regulating professional organization progressively restrict basic entry requirements - i.e. raise the standard - on prospective applicants which were never completed, nor are required to be completed, by current members?

Experience?

If the test of competency / negligence means that all architects are deemed to provide a professional standard of care, and therefore there are no 'classes' of architects, how do architects with certified educational credentials compare with broadly-experienced architects with built projects under their belt?

It is a privilege to become, and remain, a member. The mandate of the AIBC is to actively regulate the practice of architecture in order to actively maintain public trust and confidence in the role of the architect, providing rights and imposing obligations on its members in return for the right of exclusive practice.

posted by Lisa @ 9:37 AM