 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
john_t
Member
| Joined: | Wed Apr 7th, 2004 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 06:35 pm |
|
I was comparing the ARE 3.1 to 4 transition chart and the reverse trans. chart. In theory, these should relate logically, but there is a discrepancy: Pre-Design.
In the direct, chart, it looks like Pre-Design is assocaited with only the Programming section in 4.0. But in the reverse chart, PD is associated with Programming AND Site Planning. Shouldn't the direct chart include Programming AND Site Planning/Design under Pre-Design.
|
FinitoCompleto
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 7th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 217 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 06:46 pm |
|
No, it's not a mistake.
The very reason that there are both a "transition chart" and a "reverse transition chart" is because the relationships are different.
If you do not pass Pre Design in 3.1 then you must take Programming, because the part of the exam that Pre Design currently covers in 3.1 will be in Programming in 4.0.
But Programming in 4.0 includes material from both Pre Design AND Site Planning in 3.1.
So if you want to avoid taking Programming in 4.0 then you need to take Pre Design AND Site Planning in 3.1.
The "transition chart" is simply what will happen if you don't pass a particular 3.1 test before the end of 3.1. It doesn't concern itself with which other tests you have or haven't passed - just which tests you will have to take if you don't pass one particular 3.1 test.
You'll see that for both SP and PD it indicates you'll have to take Programming if you don't pass either of those in 3.1.
The "reverse transition chart" is a chart of what you'll have to take in 3.1 to AVOID taking any one particular test in 4.0.
See?Last edited on Wed Aug 13th, 2008 06:50 pm by FinitoCompleto
|
john_t
Member
| Joined: | Wed Apr 7th, 2004 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 156 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 07:08 pm |
|
| Yep, I see it. It's a bit misleading, because the direct chart makes it look like PD affects only the Programming test in 4.0. But PD is required for the new SP credit as well, per the reverse chart.
|
FinitoCompleto
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 7th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 217 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 13th, 2008 09:17 pm |
|
The transition chart is NOT a chart of what you WON'T have to take in 4.0 if you DO pass a particular 3.1 test.
It's only a chart of what you definitely WILL have to take in 4.0 if you DON'T pass that particular 3.1 test.
That's a big distinction.
It's helpful if you remember the rules of formal logic from high-school or college. The opposite and the contra-positive aren't the same thing.
The transition chart is telling you that IF you do not pass PD in 3.1 THEN you must take Programming.
You're making the mistaken step of trying to reverse the info on the transition chart, so that it means "IF you must take Programming THEN you have not passed PD." That's not a true statement, because as you've discovered, you could have passed PD and still need to take Programming due to the fact that you haven't passed SD.
You can never simply reverse an IF, THEN statement and be assured that the result is true.
You can only be sure that the contra-positive is true. The contra-positive is the result of reversing the two subjects of the sentence AND reversing the positives & negatives in the first statement:
Statement #1: IF you do not pass PD in 3.1 THEN you must take Programming
Contra-positive of Statement #1: IF you do not need to take Programming, THEN you passed PD. (True!)
The practical ramifications of this as it relates to the transition chart:
if you did not pass PD in 3.1 then you'd definitely have to take Programming - and that's completely irrelevant to whether or not you've passed SP, because either way you still have to take Programming!
Similarly, if you did not pass SP in 3.1 then you'd definitely have to take Programming and SPD - completely regardless of whether or not you've passed PD in 3.1.
That's all that chart is trying to tell you.
The reverse transition chart is the opposite. It's the chart of what you WON'T have to take in 4.0 if you DID pass a certain test or group of tests in 3.1.
The two charts outline two different issues.Last edited on Wed Aug 13th, 2008 09:51 pm by FinitoCompleto
|
techman123
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | A R C H I T E C T, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 152 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 18th, 2008 08:21 pm |
|
| ONLY NCARB COULD MAKE SOMETHING SO SIMPLE SO COMPLICATED.
|
justdrawinglines
Member
| Joined: | Fri Apr 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | New York USA |
| Posts: | 557 |
| Exams Taken: | GS, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | failure is NOT an option |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 18th, 2008 08:25 pm |
|
| http://www.areforum.org/forums/view_topic.php?id=56044&forum_id=10&jump_to=301016#p301016
|
Current time is 05:14 am | |
|
|
|
|
