Matthew Arnold Architect Vienna, Virginia

March 2011

mda1618@gmail.com

ning LicensureConcer

Submitted to: Members of the State Boards of Architecture American Institute of Architects National Architecture Accrediting Board Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture National Council of Architectural Registration Boards Practicing Architects in the United States

Architecture: Concerning Licensure by Matthew Arnold

licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

The author received a B.Arch from Cooper Union in 1982; was licensed as an Architect in New Jersey 9245 (1985) and Virginia 7282 (1989); has served as the representative of the Virginia Society AIA on the

Virginia State Building Code Technical Review Board since 2003; and practices architecture in Virginia. contact: mda1618@gmail.com

NEBRASKA For Nebraska residents who obtained their license as architects in 2009, the average time from graduation to licensure was 10.89 years. Although Nebraska's population of architects is far smaller than New York's, the trend is identical. The average time to licensure prior to 1985 hovers at five years, and has increased to ten years in the time since then.

Concerning Licensurepage 1

How long is Architectural Internship taking? Concerning Licensure In the United States, the regulation of architectural licensure is administered by 54 jurisdictions: each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam and the US Virgin Islands. Although each jurisdiction has a unique constellation of requirements for the qualifications for practice, the model process requires a degree in Architecture from an NAAB-accredited program (a B.Arch or an M.Arch), an internship (IDP) of about three years (5,600 hours supervised by a licensed architect) and the demonstration of minimum competence on the Architectural Registration Examination (ARE), currently consisting of seven divisional tests administered over 33.5 hours. All seven divisions must be passed within five calendar years. Many jurisdictions have procedures for qualifying those with non-accredited or foreign degrees, foreign experience, or work experience in lieu of a formal education. In the 1990s the profession commissioned what would become the Boyer Report, a call to comprehensive reform in the way architecture is taught and practiced in America. The Boyer Report called for a unified profession where the realms of practice and education were closely integrated. Can we identify any trends as a result of the changes made in the time since Boyer?

1. Registration Board Licensing Requirements http://www.ncarb.org/en/Getting-an-Initial-License/Registration-Board-Requirements.aspx refer to NCARB Position. 2. Building Community: A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice, 1996. http://academics.triton.edu/faculty/fheitzman/boyer.html 3. According to the 2009 Report on Accreditation prepared by the NAAB, only one of three faculty of all accredited programs are licensed in any jurisdiction. http://naab.org/documents/streamfile.aspx?name=2009+Report+on+Accreditation.pdf&path=Public+Documents%5cAccreditation%5cNAAB+Report+on+Accreditation%5c in 2008 the NAAB reported this figure at over 40%. http://naab.org/documents/streamfile.aspx?name=2008+NAAB+Report+FINAL.pdf&path=Public+Documents%5cAccreditation%5cNAAB+Report+on+Accreditation%5c. The ratio of practitioners among these licensees is unclear in the reporting.

2

3

1

OREGON For residents of Oregon licensed in 2009, the period of time from graduation to licensure averaged 9.9 years for B.Arch holders and 7.47 years for those who held an M.Arch (9.27 years regardless of degree-type).

Figure 5. Time to licensure, Oregon-resident Licensed Architects.

Concerning Licensurepage 2

Certainly qualitative questions regarding the education, training, and licensure of architects provide a rich source of topics for discussion; however, this report is focused on the quantitative questions: How many are enrolling in the process? How long does IDP take? How long does the ARE take? How do the graduates of different programs compare to each other and to those with other qualifications, in terms of time to licensure and attrition? How do graduates of public and private institutions compare in this regard? What effect on overall pass rates and testing-duration can be attributed to the change to the rules allowing candidates to schedule their divisional exams at-will? How many abandon the process? The AIA and NCARB jointly publish a report every other year or so detailing the results of a survey of internship. The most recent report attempted to survey 54,000 interns, eliciting 10,500 responses. The questions pursue attitudes and expectations and the responses convey the impression that architectural internship is commonly completed relatively rapidly. “Three to four years is the most commonly reported time frame” according to the 2010 Report (other recent reports contain similar language, sometimes couched as being the expectations of the respondents). Eighty percent of those responding to the survey in 2010 stated they were able to complete their internship in six years or less. If these respondents are an accurate sample, then 43,000 of the 54,000 (80%) will complete their internship in six years or less. Over the long term we would expect 1/6 of these to complete their internship annually - 7,200 or so. But we issue less than half of this number of licenses (about 3,000 a year) to new architects. This points to an error of a factor of two or three in the self-reported data, a discrepancy that calls for an examination of IDP and the ARE using less subjective methods. Surveys that use self-selected samples can point to conclusions that are not supported by the facts, an expectation bias that can be avoided if, instead, quantitative data in the relevant records are examined. In the case of the Internship and Career survey, statistical claims that “three to four years is the most commonly reported time frame from graduation to licensure” do not withstand scrutiny when compared to the official public records.

4

4. AIA/NCARB Internship and Career Study 2010: http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aiab082837.pdf Surveys for 2007, 2005, 2003 are available at http://aiawebdev2.aia.org/ep2_template.cfm?pagename=nac_surveypast (links on the AIA pages may expire).

Where can we get better data? VERITAS In March of 2010 an inquiry was made to each of the NCARB member boards requesting statistical information concerning: "-- duration of internship for all candidates (not just licensees), including school, degree, and date of graduation, date of licensure -- complete pass and attempt rates for the ARE examination, not just by test division, but overall. Candidates who pass 8 out of 9 test divisions are no more an architect than those who never make the attempt, so the currently-published data regarding the ARE components is inconclusive in regard to pass-rates of the ARE as a single exam -- age distribution of licensed architects -- legislation and regulatory initiatives relating to internship, licensure, practice, and title protection for architects" As a result of this inquiry, the following communication was provided to the Chairs of each board (emphasis added):

Concerning Licensurepage 3

What information is available? Data reported by the schools in 2006 (published by the NAAB) provide a snapshot of the circumstances in the education system. Charts of this data are provided in Appendix I (Request for Information) and Appendix VII (Wing Diagrams). The IDP Advisory Committee, AIA, and NCARB offered no response to that request. Data reported by NCARB on an annual basis is charted in Appendix V (ARE Divisional Pass Rates), Appendix VI (Licensed Architects (US)), and Appendix VII (Map of NAAB-degree Requirements). Tom Spector of Oklahoma State University has researched the aging of the population of licensed architects, graphed in Appendix VII (Age of Licensed Architects). Responses to an inquiry sent to each accredited program of architecture is attached in Appendix II. No school was able to furnish non-anecdotal data concerning the career outcomes of their graduates, although some did express interest in the subject. Responses to an inquiry sent to each of the 54 licensing jurisdictions is attached in Appendix III. New York, Nebraska, and Oregon were able to provide meaningful information; the others were unable to assist or referred the request to NCARB. The data from the three states that provided data on their licensees is included in Appendix IV, where it is also charted. The architects in these three states include 11,374 of the 105,312 currently-licensed architects in the US, representing 10.8% of all architects licensed. The states are geographically and economically diverse, and although this report is not concerned with statistical extrapolation, reliable conclusions can be drawn from the information. Selected charts from the state reports are shown in the following pages.

5

6

5. NAAB 2006 Statistics Report http://naab.org/documents/streamfile.aspx?name=2006_Stat_Report.xls&path=Public+Documents%5cAccreditation%5cNAAB+Report+on+Accreditation%5c (copy attached in archive attached). 6. NCARB's 2010 Survey of Licensed Architects http://www.ncarb.org/News-and-Events/News/2010/2010-Architect-Survey.aspx ARE Pass Rates by School http://www.ncarb.org/ARE/ARE-Pass-Rates/Pass-Rates-by-School.aspx (spreadsheet of compiled data in archive attached).

What should we know? QUANTITATIVE DATA Data necessary to create a complete picture of the path to licensure is as follows: Schools of Architecture: admittances, enrollment, and graduates on an annual basis for each program. Time-to-complete degree requirements for each graduate would be illuminating. Internship: newly-opened files, total IDP enrollment, total completions, on an annual basis, by state and by school and degree and year of graduation. Work experience profiles correlated to this would be especially helpful; this information is provided to NCARB via the survey given to each test-taker at the conclusion of every test-division. Examination: number of unique candidates testing, number of test-divisions attempted and passed, re-take profiles, number of candidates successfully completing the ARE annually, by state and by school, degree, and year of graduation. Test results for the ARE as an entirety should be published as well as results by test-division. Licensure: for each licensing jurisdiction, the number of applications applied for and granted by examination, reciprocity, or other means on an annual basis, including the age, school, degree, and year of graduation. Number of lapsed or withdrawn licenses would complete the picture. With this information attrition rates and duration of the process could be known. Without it, any discussion of outcomes will be anecdotal and inconclusive.

Concerning Licensurepage 4

What do we know? NEW YORK New York provided records for all currently licensed architects in the state, approximately 15,000 in total (9,000 state residents and 6,000 living elsewhere). Of all US jurisdictions, only California has more architects. An analysis of the New York records reveals an unmistakable trend of the increasing length of internship. The data show that in 1983 when the ARE was introduced, more than half of all newly-licensed architects had graduated less than 5 years prior; 26 years later, this group has been reduced to less than 10% of the total, and more than half of new licenses were issued to those who had graduated at least ten years earlier.

A note on the schools NCARB annually publishes pass-rate data for individual test-divisions tabulated by school. Charts of this data are attached at Appendix V, graphed with relative performance on the horizontal axis and total attempted tests on the vertical axis. Of 75,732 tests attempted by graduates between 2004 and 2008, the average pass rate was 72%, with 700 test-attempts by graduates of the average program. Eight accredited programs had no graduates at all who attempted any test division in the period, Five of these had been accredited in 2004 or earlier. There were seven accredited programs whose graduates maintain a divisional pass-rate lower than 50%. Graduates of all programs averaged 19 divisional-test-attempts per suite of tests passed (there were formerly nine divisions, now there are seven). One hundred and eight accredited programs are represented in the data; graduates of 19 of these programs average more than 25 test-division-attempts per full suite of passed exams. Because of the way the data is reported, the ratio of licenses actually obtained to the number of full-suite-passes is unknown. A complete picture of the relationship between accredited programs and successful licensure would include this data since NAAB-accreditation serves no purpose other than as a gateway to licensure, and these programs are accredited for no other reason. For the three-year period in question, the graduates of 22 accredited programs averaged fewer than 5 suites of passed ARE test-divisions annually; for all programs, the average was 21. The poorest performing ten schools, combined, for the three-years examined, had a total of 34 full-suites of passed test-divisions. While licensure rates are not the only measure of the success of an architectural educational program, it is certainly relevant, if not of primary significance, to accreditation. An accurate and complete picture of our performance in this regard is will provide an essential platform for a meaningful discussion of reform.

Figure 1. Duration: Graduation to Licensure, NY State 2009

Concerning Licensurepage 5

DURATION: GRADUATION TO LICENSURE

NY STATE RESIDENT ARCHITECTS ONLY - ACTIVE LICENSES (Graduates Of Schools With NAAB-Accredited Programs)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2005

2000

1995

1990

1985

1980

1975

1970

1965

1960

1955

AR

E

% OF LICENSES ISSUED

GREATER THAN 10 YEARS

5 TO 10 YEARS

5 YEARS OR LESS

It is likely that in New York, those who pursue licensure by means of obtaining education in lieu of licensure (twelve years minimum) are accomplishing their goal sooner than their counterparts who have chosen the more conventional route of a degree (five to eight years) plus an internship (nine to twelve years); although it is difficult to imagine that this outcome was contemplated by those who designed the system.

The percentage of those acquiring a license through non-traditional means (those with foreign or non-accredited degrees, those qualifying by means of experience in lieu of a formal education) has increased from less than 5% in 1985 to more than 20% of the total today. This trend of an increasing proportion of non-traditional applicants may be attributed in part to New York's regulatory flexibility (in comparison to the requirements in other states) attracting a higher concentration of non-traditional applicants.

Figure 2. Licensed Architects by degree, 2009

Concerning Licensurepage 6

Active licenses, October 2009Licensed Architects (NY State)

INACTIVE / EXPIRED LICENSE

UNKNOWN - DATA NOT ON FILE

IN-STATE RESIDENT, ACCREDITED DEGREE

OUT-OF-STATE RESIDENT, ACCREDITED DEGREE

NON-ACCREDITED DEGREE

FOREIGN DEGREE

EXPERIENCE IN LIEU OF FORMAL EDUCATION

EDUCATION

200

600

2005

2000

1995

1990

1985

1980

1975

1970

1965

1960

1955

1950

0

# L

ICE

NS

ES

IS

SU

ED

YEAR

AR

E IN

TR

OD

UC

ED

Concerning Licensurepage 7

In 2009, in New York, the average time from graduation for all resident-architects was 11.06 years.

Figure 3. Time to licensure, NY State-resident Architects.

0

5

10

15

20

25

YEA

RS

SIN

CE

GR

AD

UA

TIO

N

NY STATE RESIDENT LICENSED ARCHITECTS

INITIAL YEAR OF LICENSURE 20

00

2005

2010

1995

1990

1985

1980

1975

1970

1965

1960

1955

AR

E IN

TR

OD

UC

ED

ACTIVE LICENSES (Graduates Of Schools With NAAB-Accredited Programs)

AVERAGE

11.06

Files containing this report and appendixes are located at <http://tinyurl.com/ConcerningLicensure> (<https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B6pgQmW4YXbGMjQwMGY5ODYtOTIwZC00YjViLTgxMzEtMWM3YjMzMmRjOTgx&hl=en>)

NEBRASKA For Nebraska residents who obtained their license as architects in 2009, the average time from graduation to licensure was 10.89 years. Although Nebraska's population of architects is far smaller than New York's, the trend is identical. The average time to licensure prior to 1985 hovers at five years, and has increased to ten years in the time since then.

Figure 4. Time to licensure, Nebraska-resident Licensed Architects.

Concerning Licensurepage 8

0

5

10

15

20

25

YEA

RS

SIN

CE

GR

AD

UA

TIO

N

NEBRASKA LICENSED ARCHITECTS

INITIAL YEAR OF LICENSURE 20

00

2005

2010

1995

1990

1985

1980

1975

1970

1965

1960

1955

AR

E IN

TR

OD

UC

ED

ACTIVE LICENSES - ALL

10.89

M.Arch Degree B.Arch Degree Non-Accredited

AVERAGE

OREGON For residents of Oregon licensed in 2009, the period of time from graduation to licensure averaged 9.9 years for B.Arch holders and 7.47 years for those who held an M.Arch (9.27 years regardless of degree-type).

Figure 5. Time to licensure, Oregon-resident Licensed Architects.

Figure 5. Time to licensure, Oregon-resident Licensed Architects.

Concerning Licensurepage 9

0

5

10

15

20

25

YEA

RS

SIN

CE

GR

AD

UA

TIO

N

OREGON LICENSED ARCHITECTS

INITIAL YEAR OF LICENSURE 20

00

2005

2010

1995

1990

1985

1980

1975

1970

1965

1960

1955

AR

E IN

TR

OD

UC

ED

ACTIVE LICENSES

9.90

AVER

AGE 7.47

M.Arch Degree B.Arch Degree

Where can we get better data? VERITAS In March of 2010 an inquiry was made to each of the NCARB member boards requesting statistical information concerning: "-- duration of internship for all candidates (not just licensees), including school, degree, and date of graduation, date of licensure -- complete pass and attempt rates for the ARE examination, not just by test division, but overall. Candidates who pass 8 out of 9 test divisions are no more an architect than those who never make the attempt, so the currently-published data regarding the ARE components is inconclusive in regard to pass-rates of the ARE as a single exam -- age distribution of licensed architects -- legislation and regulatory initiatives relating to internship, licensure, practice, and title protection for architects" As a result of this inquiry, the following communication was provided to the Chairs of each board (emphasis added):

From: "Lenore Lucey" <lmlucey@ncarb.org> To: State Board Chairs <list suppressed> Date: 03/30/2010 04:35 PM Subject: NCARB Mail: Request for Statistics Hello Chairs, Recently Mr Matthew Arnold contacted our member board members requesting statistics on architecture licensing. Many of you called or wrote to ask why Mr. Arnold was asking and seeking our advice on your response. NCARB is aware of Mr. Arnold's efforts to compile data. He also requested data from us which we are unable to provide as we do not collect the specific information he is seeking. We know that he is already using some data from the NCARB website which is available to the public, apparently for a book. Your board will need to decide how to respond to Mr. Arnold as did Jim Lev of the Illinois Board. Mr. Lev's response is copied below for your information. Sincerely, Lenore

Concerning Licensurepage 10

NCARB's files do include the information being sought; every applicant provides it when establishing and updating an NCARB record. In fact, NCARB staff independently verifies the accuracy of the claims. The contradiction implicit in Ms Lucey's peculiar statement to the chairs of NCARB's Member Boards is impossible to reconcile with NCARB's "primary function to maintain records for state boards, architects, and interns." These are public records, required by law in furtherance of the public good, mandated and relied upon by public agencies in discharging their duty to protect the public welfare. We have deemed this information relevant to the success of that effort; otherwise it would not be collected. If it is relevant, why should it not be publicly disseminated? Students, educators, interns, professionals, regulators, and the public at large all have an interest in sharing an accurate understanding of the truth. The trends apparent in New York, Nebraska, and Oregon are unsustainable. If the outcomes in these states are representative of the country as a whole, then our system of education, internship, and licensure is not functioning as expected; and certainly it is not functioning as advertised. At a very minimum, we have a joint responsibility to the next generation -- as educators, regulators, aspiring architects, and practitioners -- to be truthful about the what is required to become an architect. The representation that the process from entering an accredited Architectural School to achieving Architectural licensure in eight to ten years is contrary to the experience of the vast majority of those who enroll in the process. Of those entering college who will go on to achieve licensure, most will take 15 to 17 years to accomplish the goal of licensure; moreover, a majority of graduates do not appear ever to become licensed. Public statements to the contrary misrepresent a career path that is reasonably predictable to aspiring architects. Without measurement, effective management is impossible. Unintended outcomes inevitably follow false measurements. This call for accountability does not come from an institutional source with a vested interest in the outcome; it comes from a practicing architect who believes that as a profession we share a passion for truth and beauty, and we know that a strong foundation is a primary design imperative. Matthew Arnold Architect Vienna, Virginia March 2011

Concerning Licensurepage 11

A note on the schools NCARB annually publishes pass-rate data for individual test-divisions tabulated by school. Charts of this data are attached at Appendix V, graphed with relative performance on the horizontal axis and total attempted tests on the vertical axis. Of 75,732 tests attempted by graduates between 2004 and 2008, the average pass rate was 72%, with 700 test-attempts by graduates of the average program. Eight accredited programs had no graduates at all who attempted any test division in the period, Five of these had been accredited in 2004 or earlier. There were seven accredited programs whose graduates maintain a divisional pass-rate lower than 50%. Graduates of all programs averaged 19 divisional-test-attempts per suite of tests passed (there were formerly nine divisions, now there are seven). One hundred and eight accredited programs are represented in the data; graduates of 19 of these programs average more than 25 test-division-attempts per full suite of passed exams. Because of the way the data is reported, the ratio of licenses actually obtained to the number of full-suite-passes is unknown. A complete picture of the relationship between accredited programs and successful licensure would include this data since NAAB-accreditation serves no purpose other than as a gateway to licensure, and these programs are accredited for no other reason. For the three-year period in question, the graduates of 22 accredited programs averaged fewer than 5 suites of passed ARE test-divisions annually; for all programs, the average was 21. The poorest performing ten schools, combined, for the three-years examined, had a total of 34 full-suites of passed test-divisions. While licensure rates are not the only measure of the success of an architectural educational program, it is certainly relevant, if not of primary significance, to accreditation. An accurate and complete picture of our performance in this regard is will provide an essential platform for a meaningful discussion of reform.

Concerning Licensurepage 12

Concerning Licensurepage 13

2004 - 2008

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%71.7%

100

200

300

400

500

600

800

900

1,000

701

ARE Divisional Pass Rates - 2004 - 2008 cumulative totals Graduates of NAAB-Accredited US Programs of Architecture

PASS RATE

TO

TA

L A

RE

TE

ST

DIV

ISIO

NS

AT

TE

MP

TE

D

Source of Data: NCARB; http://www.ncarb.org/ARE/ARE-Pass-Rates/Pass-Rates-by-School.aspx

Note: Shaded areas indicate middle third. 75,732 total test divisions attempted

1,100

1,200

1,300

1,400

1,500

1,600

1,700

1,800

1,900

2,000

Average, all programsA

vera

ge, a

ll gr

adua

tes

WEST

SOUTH WEST

WEST CENTRAL

EAST CENTRAL

SOUTH EAST

NORTH EAST

Circles proportional to size of 2006 graduating class, taken from NAAB 2006 Stat_Report.

50

200

100

CLASS SIZE UNAVAILABLE

Color indicates region. Avg. graduating class, 2006: 90

Miami

U of Detroit, Mercy

Ball State

Andrews

U of Kentucky

Kent State

University of Cincinnati

Lawrence

Tech

Ohio State

U of Notre Dame

U of Michigan

U of Texas, Austin

U of Louisiana,

Lafayette

Louisiana Tech

U of New Mexico

Texas A&M

Texas Tech

U of Texas, Arlington

U of Houston

U of Arkansas

Louisiana State

Rice

Prairie View A & M

Southern U and

A & M College

Tulane

U of California,

Berkley

California Polytechnic State

San Luis Obispo

U of Oregon

U of Colorado

U of Arizona

Arizona State

SCIArch

California State Polytechnic,

Pomona

USC

UCLA

U of Washington

Montana State

U of Idaho

California

College of

Arts & Crafts

U of Hawaii

U of Utah

Washington State

Woodbury

New School

UNLV

Frank Lloyd Wright

School of Architecture

Morgan State

Norwich

Cooper Union

Parsons

Princeton

CUNY

NJIT

Pratt

U of Pennsylvania

Drexel

Cornell

Yale

Harvard

BAC

Columbia

Syracuse

NYIT

SUNY BuffaloRoger Williams

RISD

MIT

Wentworth

TemplePenn State

Philadelphia U

U of Maryland

RensselaerCarnegie Mellon

Howard

Auburn

U of Miami

Tuskegee Hampton

U of Puerto Rico

Florida A & M

Southern Polytechnic State

U of Virginia

U of South Florida

U of Tennessee, Knoxville

North Carolina State

Georgia Institute of Technology

Clemson

Catholic

Mississippi State

UNC Charlotte

Virginia Polytechnic Institute

U of Florida

Savannah

IIT

U of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Kansas State

U of Wisconsin, Milwaukee

U of Illinois, ChicagoU of Kansas

U of Oklahoma

Washington U, St. Louis

North

Dakota

State

U of Nebraska

Oklahoma State

U of Minnesota

Iowa State

Drury

Matthew Arnold Architect

3 5

42

1 5

58

5 4

128

6 5

45

2 5

22

WEST WEST CENTRAL

EAST CENTRAL SOUTH EAST

NORTH EAST

25

16

SOUTH WEST

Concerning Licensurepage 14

Files containing this report and appendixes are located at <http://tinyurl.com/ConcerningLicensure> (<https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B6pgQmW4YXbGMjQwMGY5ODYtOTIwZC00YjViLTgxMzEtMWM3YjMzMmRjOTgx&hl=en>)

2.2 MBthis document

Concerning Licensure.pdf

12.9 MBzip file archive containing this report and appendixes.

Appendixes.zip

1 MB

338 KB

351 KB

1 MB

87 KB

456 KB

Map showing geographic distribution of Architects, Students, and Accredited Schools of Architecture

Accredited Schools of Architecture, diagrams showing admittances, graduates, class size, faculty composition, ordered by size of graduating class

NAAB Source data

Compilation of NCARB data on ARE pass rates by school

Compilation of NCARB data by-state licensed architects 1999-2010

2008 Request to IDP Advisory Committee

Ax1 Figure 2.pdf

Ax1 Figure 3.pdf

Ax1 NAAB 2006_Stat_Report.xls

Ax1 NCARB School data.xls

Ax1 NCARB Survey of Lic Arch.xls

Ax1 Request for Information.pdf

file sizeRequest and responses from accredited programs of architecture

Ax2 School Responses.pdf

file sizeRequest and responses from 54 architecture licensing boards

Ax3 Initial request to Boards.pdf

224 KB

3 MB

336 KB

98 KB

2 MB

123 KB

graphic display of licensure statistics, Nebraska 2009

graphic display of licensure statistics, New York 2009

graphic display of licensure statistics, Oregon 2009

Source data furnished by Nebraska

Source data furnished by New York

Source data furnished by Oregon

Ax4 Nebraska Report.pdf

Ax4 NY Report.pdf

Ax4 Oregon Report.pdf

Ax4 Source NEBRASKA.xls

Ax4 Source NY.txt

Ax4 Source OREGON.xls

Appendix I - Request For Information

Appendix II - Colleges responses

Appendix III - State Boards responses

Appendix IV - New York, Nebraska, and Oregon

Concerning Licensurepage 15

911 KB

173 KB

Graphic presentation of NCARB data showing pass rates and test attempts for graduates of accredited programs 2004 - 2008

Graphic presentation of NCARB data showing divisional pass rates for graduates of accredited programs

Ax5 ARE Divisional Pass Rates 2004-2008.pdf

Ax5 ARE Divisional Pass Rates by School.pdf

1 MBGraphic presentation of NCARB data showing quantity of licensed architects by type, by state 1999-2009

Ax6 Licensed Architects (US) 1999-2009.pdf

42 KB

42 KB

98 KB

99 KB

64 KB

485 KB

53 KB

426 KB

Graphic presentation of NCARB data showing pass rates and test attempts for graduates of accredited programs 2005

Graphic presentation of NCARB data showing pass rates and test attempts for graduates of accredited programs 2006

Graphic presentation of NCARB data showing pass rates and test attempts for graduates of accredited programs 2007

Graphic presentation of NCARB data showing pass rates and test attempts for graduates of accredited programs 2008

Charts showing demographic changes, from data obtained by Tom Spector, Oklahoma State University

Map showing states where NAAB-accredited degree is a requirement for licensure

2008 faculty, Virginia schools, licensed and unlicensed architects

Accredited Schools of Architecture, diagrams showing admittances, graduates, class size, faculty composition, ordered alphabetically

Ax7 2005 ARE Pass Rates.pdf

Ax7 2006 ARE Pass Rates.pdf

Ax7 2007 ARE Pass Rates.pdf

Ax7 2008 ARE Pass Rates.pdf

Ax7 Age of Licensed Architects.pdf

Ax7 Map of NAAB-degree requirements.pdf

Ax7 Virginia Faculty.pdf

Ax7 Wing Diagrams.pdf

Appendix V - Accredited Programs of Architecture - ARE test results

Appendix VI - NCARB Survey of Licensed Architects in the US

Appendix VII - Other Charts and Figures

Concerning Licensurepage 16

I am grateful to Teeny Simmons, Tom Spector, Nicholas Agneta, Curtis B. Wayne, Jim Cramer, Rod Knox, Daniel Friedman, Ben Rudgers, Val Williams, Bob Rosenfeld, and many others who consistently provided challenges and illuminating insights that improved the quality of this work. The views expressed are my own.