NCARB BOD Takes Action Against ARE Confidentiality Agreement Violators

The ARE is designed to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public by providing a psychometrically justifiable and legally defensible process that measures the level of competence necessary to practice independently. The exam has multiple divisions that test a candidate's ability to perform many of the tasks an architect encounters in practice. To become licensed, a candidate must fulfill education and experience requirements, and pass all divisions of the ARE.

NCARB takes upholding the integrity of the ARE very seriously—for the benefit of the profession and in order to safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Candidates who sit for the ARE agree to the rules by which it is administered. These rules, clearly spelled out in the ARE Guidelines, include: test center regulations, grounds for dismissal, the Confidentiality Agreement, and the NCARB Board of Directors' Policy on Disclosure and Cheating. The consequences of violating the rules are clearly stated in the Confidentiality Agreement that candidates must accept prior to taking every ARE division.

Recently, eight ARE candidates had their testing privileges suspended and scores canceled for posting exam content and/or questions on the internet. The disclosure of the ARE content diminishes the reliability and defensibility of the exam and ultimately undermines the integrity of the process.

The action taken by the NCARB Board of Directors is as follows:

British Columbia candidate:

Three-year suspension of exam testing privileges and cancellation of one exam score (Mechanical & Electrical Systems)

California candidate:

Three-year suspension of exam testing privileges and cancellation of one exam score (Site Planning)

New Jersey candidate:

Four-year suspension of exam testing privileges and cancellation of one exam score (Site Planning)

New York candidate:

Five-year suspension of exam testing privileges

New York candidate:

Three-year suspension of exam testing privileges

New York candidate:

Three-year suspension of exam testing privileges

New York candidate:

One-year suspension of exam testing privileges and cancellation of two exam scores (Construction Documents & Services and Pre-Design)

Ontario candidate:

Three-year suspension of exam testing privileges and cancellation of one exam score (Site Planning)

All disciplinary actions become a part of each individual's permanent NCARB Record.

When candidates disclose exam content, NCARB works with the Council's test development consultant to determine the impact on the exam. If NCARB finds that it is necessary turn off substantial amounts of content, our ability to continuously deliver the ARE is jeopardized. The Council also faces significant financial ramifications because of the need to replace the exposed content and retain attorneys to defend the exam's copyright and integrity.

Due to the actions of several of the candidates noted above, NCARB has turned off selected content in one division of the ARE. Should additional content be disclosed, we will need to evaluate the impact and will consider extending the mandatory six-month waiting period between failed divisions until such time the content can be replaced.

Questions? See our Factually Answered Questions section on ARE Security.

NCARB Announces Major Improvements to the Intern Development Program

NCARB is updating the IDP requirements to more closely align with the current practice of architecture. The new program requirements, which will be rolled out as "IDP 2.0," will help ensure that interns acquire the comprehensive training that is essential for competent practice and will make reporting experience fundamentally easier.

The changes to the IDP have been developed in response to the 2007 Practice Analysis of Architecture. In April 2007, NCARB invited more than 50,000 architects from across the United States and Canada to participate in this study. A record 9,835 practicing architects responded by completing an extensive electronic survey to identify the tasks, knowledge, and skills that recently licensed architects, practicing independently, need to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. The results of this study were used as a basis for IDP 2.0, the most significant update to the IDP since its inception over 30 years ago.

The proposed changes to the IDP offer many benefits to interns by allowing them to complete some of the training requirements during periods of unemployment, expanding the definition of "direct supervision," and simplifying the reporting process. These changes will be rolled out in three phases over the next two years.

IDP 2.0 Phase One

The first phase of IDP 2.0, to be implemented on 1 July 2009, will allow interns—whether employed or not—to earn training units by completing LEED accreditation and by completing specified architecture-related certificate programs offered by the Construction Specifications Institute. They will also be able to earn training units by reading the NCARB Professional Conduct monograph and passing the related quiz.

Also on 1 July 2009, interns can complete activities in the Emerging Professional Companion (EPC 2009), review them with their IDP supervisor, and submit for TUs to satisfy minimum training unit requirements for the IDP. Five training units toward the minimum requirements in each training area will be allowed for successfully completed EPC 2009 activities. Details about EPC 2009, scheduled for release on 1 July 2009, will be coming soon.

IDP 2.0 Phase Two

Phase two of IDP 2.0, scheduled for implementation on 1 January 2010, is contingent on the passage of Resolution 2009-04 at the Annual Meeting in June 2009. If a majority of NCARB's Member Boards does not pass the resolution, the implementation of phase two will be delayed.

In the second phase of IDP 2.0, the definitions of "direct supervision" and "registered architect" will be updated to reflect current architectural practice. The new definition of "direct supervision" will allow IDP supervisors to supervise their interns through a mix of personal contact and remote communication (e.g. e-mail, online markups, webinars, and internet). The new definition of a "registered architect" will allow a person registered to practice architecture in a U.S. or Canadian jurisdiction to serve as an IDP supervisor. That means that registered architects will be able to supervise interns within their office even if they are not registered in the jurisdiction where the office is located. In addition, both interns and supervisors who are "independent contractors" will be able to participate in the IDP in accordance with the revised definition of direct supervision.

Phase two will also change the IDP Training Requirement from "700 Training Units" to "5,600 Training Hours." The actual number of hours required to satisfy the IDP Training Requirement remains the same, however, interns will no longer have to convert the hours they spend in each training area into training units. This should make reporting work experience easier and more accurate.

IDP 2.0 Phase Three

The third phase of IDP 2.0, scheduled for implementation on 1 January 2011, will align the current IDP training areas with the new experience areas required for the competent practice of architecture as identified in the 2007 Practice Analysis of Architecture.

The IDP was created in 1976 by NCARB and the American Institute of Architects (AIA) to provide emerging architects with a structured transition between education and registration. The program established specific training requirements and provided a uniform system for documentation and assessment of internship activity. Over the past four years, NCARB has committed more than 17,000 volunteer hours, 1,200 Board of Director hours, and 12,000 staff hours, and AIA has committed more than 1,100 director hours and 4,000 staff hours toward strengthening the IDP and making it more user-friendly.