 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
jmcarr
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Architect, NCARB, Charlotte, North Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 704 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | See architect run. See architect run with x-acto blade. Ouchy! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 07:46 pm |
|
Coach wrote: Am I in a bad movie?
You might be. "Mr. Woodcock" comes to mind. But seriously, unless you know for sure the 4.0 material is the same 3.1 stuff, but repackaged, then it would be hard to address this issue with NCARB.
|
RK
Member
| Joined: | Mon Apr 19th, 2004 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 252 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | HMFIC |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 08:59 pm |
|
Man.... I hate when they spring those things on you at the last minute. 
|
skyhook
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | CA |
| Posts: | 358 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP | | Describes Me: | support where beam or wall not available |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 10:27 pm |
|
| anyone know what ncarb counts as 6 months ? 182.5 days ???
|
flats
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 10th, 2007 |
| Location: | Cleveland, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 461 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | In Sicily, women are more dangerous than shotguns. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 11:02 pm |
|
skyhook wrote: anyone know what ncarb counts as 6 months ? 182.5 days ???
There is a related discussion here: http://www.areforum.org/forums/forum10/56014.html
|
jmcarr
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Architect, NCARB, Charlotte, North Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 704 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | See architect run. See architect run with x-acto blade. Ouchy! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 01:50 am |
|
Coach wrote: On the other hand, you thought it was because NCARB wants people to get off their butts and finish. So, it's currency, period.
On the other hand, you need to improve your reading skills. Plus, your usage of the word "currency" is obscure. Try relevant or prevailing.
Despite your delusion that you're a master of expository composition, trust me, you're no Maureen Dowd. 
|
alomu
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | Missouri USA |
| Posts: | 575 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 03:02 am |
|
jmcarr wrote: Coach wrote: On the other hand, you thought it was because NCARB wants people to get off their butts and finish. So, it's currency, period.
On the other hand, you need to improve your reading skills. Plus, your usage of the word "currency" is obscure. Try relevant or prevailing.
Despite your delusion that you're a master of expository composition, trust me, you're no Maureen Dowd.
Wow, seems like folks are getting a bit off track about the original OP.
|
Punchlist
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 17th, 2006 |
| Location: | Massachusetts USA |
| Posts: | 510 |
| Exams Taken: | GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BT | | Describes Me: | Time for another go at BP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 03:16 pm |
|
The bottom line is that it is unethical (I saw that someone else thinks using "unfair" is juvenile) for NCARB to make one repeat exam content that has been taken and passed.
I'm also of the belief that only the portions of an exam that were failed previously need be repeated. My rolling clock started in early Feb. 2007. This is totally misleading, however. I know that I had to try like hell to pass the BT and SP exams as quickly as possible. I can't even fathom having to repeat exam content such the Mechanical and Structural components that others have passed simply because they slipped up and blew the 'Accessbility' and 'Roof Layout' vignettes. I'm sorry, but that is just crap. Who looked across the conference table that morning and said, "All in favor??" and witnessed a slew of hands raising? Those people should be ashamed of themselves.
In the legal system, there is 'Double Jeopardy' which provides that one cannot be convicted of a crime for which they've previously been acquitted. Who thought it was perfectly reasonable to expect that candidates should have no problem being expected to retake exams that they've already passed? This is what has never and will never make sense to me. The fact that this whole 'rolling clock' mechanism is also in place also adds to the confusion and frustration.
For some, real life simply takes the wheel and people can't prepare for, take and pass on all nine on the first shot in a one-year period. Sometimes, people have to take even more time for whatever reasons. "Too bad, so sad. Get in the back of the line and start over. NEXT!!!!" Again, I realize I'm mixing two, separate issues. Hell, we don't make people retake their on-road driving test when they reach the age of 65, although I wish to God we did.
Those who start in one version of the exam should be allowed to stay in that version of the exam until they finish, until their rolling clock expires, or be given the choice outright to start in the next version. Either that, or NCARB should have a process in place that makes candidates take exams like SP or BT before they're eligible to take the other sections. "NCARB shouldn't have to hold people's hands! They should be responsible for their own test-taking strategies!!" Really now. If it were that cut and dried, then explain to me how so many seemingly intelligent and responsible people are in the "Holy crap!! I better take BT quick before I lose credit for my other exams!!" predicament. Did they not see the big sign over entry or something? When I started in early '07, nobody told me about all this.
There's a reason why we have "WRONG WAY" or "SWIM AT YOUR OWN RISK" signs. It's not because all of us are unwary dolts. Most of us are just unaware of rip currents or shark sightings.
|
Coach
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 5083 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Architect |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 06:03 pm |
|
jmc, clearly you're the only one with the problem and I'm not alone in being subjected to it.
So, while it can be great sport to continue to bat you around like a cat with a stunned mouse, I'm bored.
|
jmcarr
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Architect, NCARB, Charlotte, North Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 704 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | See architect run. See architect run with x-acto blade. Ouchy! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 06:30 pm |
|
Coach wrote: jmc, clearly you're the only one with the problem and I'm not alone in being subjected to it.
So, while it can be great sport to continue to bat you around like a cat with a stunned mouse, I'm bored.
Hahaha...no Coach Woodcock, you are quite alone. But, to use your metaphor, I'll be more than happy to play Itchy, and you definitely make a fine Scratchy. Per the Olympics "currency" , let's enter you in the Archery competition, and, as you take aim, knot your tongue to the arrow. This way, when you release your arrow, your entrails will be delightfully evacuated from your carcass.
Bull's Eye!
Attached Image (viewed 153 times):
|
baby_architect
Member
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 07:11 pm |
|
Punchlist wrote: The bottom line is that it is unethical (I saw that someone else thinks using "unfair" is juvenile) for NCARB to make one repeat exam content that has been taken and passed.
I'm also of the belief that only the portions of an exam that were failed previously need be repeated. My rolling clock started in early Feb. 2007. This is totally misleading, however. I know that I had to try like hell to pass the BT and SP exams as quickly as possible. I can't even fathom having to repeat exam content such the Mechanical and Structural components that others have passed simply because they slipped up and blew the 'Accessbility' and 'Roof Layout' vignettes. I'm sorry, but that is just crap. Who looked across the conference table that morning and said, "All in favor??" and witnessed a slew of hands raising? Those people should be ashamed of themselves.
In the legal system, there is 'Double Jeopardy' which provides that one cannot be convicted of a crime for which they've previously been acquitted. Who thought it was perfectly reasonable to expect that candidates should have no problem being expected to retake exams that they've already passed? This is what has never and will never make sense to me. The fact that this whole 'rolling clock' mechanism is also in place also adds to the confusion and frustration.
For some, real life simply takes the wheel and people can't prepare for, take and pass on all nine on the first shot in a one-year period. Sometimes, people have to take even more time for whatever reasons. "Too bad, so sad. Get in the back of the line and start over. NEXT!!!!" Again, I realize I'm mixing two, separate issues. Hell, we don't make people retake their on-road driving test when they reach the age of 65, although I wish to God we did.
Those who start in one version of the exam should be allowed to stay in that version of the exam until they finish, until their rolling clock expires, or be given the choice outright to start in the next version. Either that, or NCARB should have a process in place that makes candidates take exams like SP or BT before they're eligible to take the other sections. "NCARB shouldn't have to hold people's hands! They should be responsible for their own test-taking strategies!!" Really now. If it were that cut and dried, then explain to me how so many seemingly intelligent and responsible people are in the "Holy crap!! I better take BT quick before I lose credit for my other exams!!" predicament. Did they not see the big sign over entry or something? When I started in early '07, nobody told me about all this.
There's a reason why we have "WRONG WAY" or "SWIM AT YOUR OWN RISK" signs. It's not because all of us are unwary dolts. Most of us are just unaware of rip currents or shark sightings.
and that was something we all started arguing back when NCARB dropped this bombshell..you're right...and they suck..and it isn't truely ethical..but again..bottom line..and we all know it..they hold the power..and we are their puppets..in order for us to get ahead and "vote w/ our feet" - first we have to play their little game..so be it..
|
skyhook
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | CA |
| Posts: | 358 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP | | Describes Me: | support where beam or wall not available |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 07:16 pm |
|
ncarb = russia
are_forum = georgia
|
dottie
Architect
| Joined: | Fri Sep 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | Wasilla, Alaska USA |
| Posts: | 1001 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | Taking Northern Design Course & passed the LEED test |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 07:36 pm |
|
jmcarr,
Being a mom of 2 growing boys, I find this type of personal insulting and name calling completely uncalled for on this forum. What does that accomplish? I hope this doesn't scare some of the new and shy ARE candidates from posting on this forum, terrified that they will be attacked and massacred.
Coach was simply pointing out an issue, in his opinion (which is allowed on this forum), with the transition and was inquiring if it affected anyone. Once a few others started to understand his point, there were a few legitimate posts.
Name calling is not what I use this forum for. "Please, play nice together and don't hit your little brother!"
|
jmcarr
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Architect, NCARB, Charlotte, North Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 704 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | See architect run. See architect run with x-acto blade. Ouchy! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 07:51 pm |
|
dottie wrote: Name calling is not what I use this forum for. "Please, play nice together and don't hit your little brother!"
Alright, despite Coach's curmudgeonly behavior towards me, I agree to play nice if Coach agrees. Thanks, Dottie!
|
dottie
Architect
| Joined: | Fri Sep 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | Wasilla, Alaska USA |
| Posts: | 1001 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | Taking Northern Design Course & passed the LEED test |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 08:34 pm |
|
Thank you jmcarr, I also see you have your old face back.
|
brudgers
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 1st, 2006 |
| Location: | The Moment |
| Posts: | 7345 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Newly described. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 15th, 2008 02:51 pm |
|
Coach wrote: I haven't seen seen anyone post about getting nailed by the rolling clock, but what in the hell is going to happen if a 3.1 BT expires after 7/1/09?
The simple answer is that 4 sections will need to be repeated!
That's awfully punitive and goes way beyond whatever the intent of the rolling clock was.
I'd bet that NCARB has no answer for this.
Another unintended consequence that would have been avoided if they would just run 3.1 concurrently with 4.0 until all 3.1 candidates give up, pass, or die trying.
I guess people will have to put on their big girl undies and deal with it.
Frankly and in light of reasonable accomodations made for disabilities, if someone can't manage their way through the ARE, they're probably not qualified to be an architect.
In the real world, if you don't get the plans in for permit before a certain date, they have to meet the new code.
|
Coach
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 5083 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Architect |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 15th, 2008 06:14 pm |
|
brudgers wrote: I guess people will have to put on their big girl undies and deal with it. Something you want to share? In the real world, if you don't get the plans in for permit before a certain date, they have to meet the new code. Sure, but if all fire-rated construction sections move to the IFC unchanged you're still in compliance. If anyone with means gets hit by this one, I don't seeing it holding up to a challenge.
|
brudgers
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 1st, 2006 |
| Location: | The Moment |
| Posts: | 7345 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Newly described. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 15th, 2008 07:54 pm |
|
Who are they going to challenge?
The qualifications for an NCARB certificate are for all practical purposes entirely within NCARB's discretion...and it's not NCARB's rolling clock which prevents candidates from getting licensed.
It's the rolling clocks established by the individual states that will prevent it.
Candidates can lobby their state board or legislature to change a particular rolling clock statute or regulation.
And NCARB has no authority to dictate how each individual state chooses to impliment the rolling clock relative to the transition.
NCARB is responsible only to the states, and the states have delegated management of the testing to NCARB, and so long as NCARB is compiling and retaining a candidate's records there's no further obligation to the candidate.
|
Coach
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 5083 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Architect |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 15th, 2008 09:18 pm |
|
brudgers wrote: Who are they going to challenge? The state, and by extension, NCARB as contractor. If state members indemnify NCARB, that's between them. Candidates are free to take action against NCARB. Technically speaking, the states have control; however, in practice, it could be easily demonstrated that some states do not excercise any control and recite the NCARB mantra without question and unedited. Patterns of behavior are very important to judges. Regardless, as licensing agencies, states have very high standard to maintain. Any attorney worth a damn could easily demonstrate the capriciousness and draconian nature of the scenario I brought up. In fact, the same could be done with the current BT deadline and I encourage anyone who gets nailed to find someone willing to take on the cause... sugar daddy, pro bono attorney, ACLU... anyone. Hell, I think a moot court at some Ivy law school would be enough to scare the feces out of NCARB.
|
brudgers
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 1st, 2006 |
| Location: | The Moment |
| Posts: | 7345 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Newly described. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 15th, 2008 09:58 pm |
|
If the state is the proper venue...which I believe it is, relief is probably limited to injunction.
I doubt that there would be anything to force NCARB to issue a certificate.
Since judicial deference is typically given to legislative intent, trying to win an argument for lowering professional standards will probably be a tough row to hoe.
I suspect that there is far less headache and cost associated with passing the tests than there is with suing a state over the rolling clock.
|
Coach
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 4th, 2008 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 5083 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Architect |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 16th, 2008 12:14 am |
|
brudgers wrote: Since judicial deference is typically given to legislative intent, trying to win an argument for lowering professional standards will probably be a tough row to hoe. No one is suggesting a lower standard. I suspect that there is far less headache and cost associated with passing the tests than there is with suing a state over the rolling clock. Vanquishing tyranny is never easy.
|
brudgers
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 1st, 2006 |
| Location: | The Moment |
| Posts: | 7345 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | Newly described. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 16th, 2008 12:22 am |
|
sic semper tyrannis?
For NCARB?
Give me a break, Jim Stark.
|
skyhook
Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | CA |
| Posts: | 358 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP | | Describes Me: | support where beam or wall not available |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 25th, 2008 03:05 pm |
|
I am one of those attempting to finish 3.1 before June 30,09. I can picture a log jam of candidates, like myself, trying to schedule tests May thru June 09 and possibly overwhelming prometrics available dates.
Some of us have purposely scheduled the last year or so to maximize our test attempts given the 6 month wait period, so its not out of the realm of possibility. I just don't know how many we number and if it will impact test availability dates leading up to the cutoff date.
Any thoughts ? Thanks.
|
Current time is 02:54 am | Page:   1 2 |
|
|
|
|
