Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: andyro
Age: 37

There is significant administration required to meet compliance. This should not be a priority.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: Heman Shih
Age: 42

Extends this to at least US Universities. Should establish committee with CACB to review their review process for other international schools. it takes too long.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: Charlie
Age: 48

The CACB administers the national education standard for the schools and the professional associations. Having 11 schools in Canada administer their own foreign certification process is not efficient or sensible.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: Donald
Age: 40

Translation should be at the cost of the applicant. RAIC should incorporate certification as part of its mandate for foreign degrees and do away with all these invidivual bodies that make the architecture profession administratively cumbersome.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: jtrop
Age: 35

This is a complex issue, and is best served either by the CACB or the provincial associations. In the UK it is done by the RIBA, and the costs and strain are similar.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: david
Age: 50

if pursued, the contractor would have to a) maintain the high standards set by the OAA AND b) possess the latitude that is occasionally required of such situations. A tough combo for an outside contractor.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: scscsc
Age: 43

Keep CACB doing this.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: patrick trottie
Age: 43

An excellent way to streamline the process into the hands of those who may be best qualified to do so.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: viktrix
Age: 34

I have voted 'no opinion' as I am not convinced this will be easy to implement. I am having trouble visualizing how it would come together. I do think it would be beneficial to make access to certification for foreign trained professionals less cost prohibitive but I think initially, something like this could be quite expensive. This expense would have to fall back to someone / somewhere. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the intention of this solution.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: mazen
Age: 47

these universities may have the interest to impliment some credit at high cost and force the applicant to take them "new bisiness"

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: vikas
Age: 36

New immigrants like me are required to have degree certified by University of toronto..it should have been CACB instead if thats really required. Why such a modern society works in so much isolation for years.. This is just one way to earn money or may we say for using new immigrants for cheap labour (draughtpersons).This is very demoralising and affects families...

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Joseph Galea
Age: 60

This would also do away with the humiliating process of a well-qualified architect sitting for an obsessive, near-paranoid interview. I know I've been through it. (By the way all my qualifications were certified - although I almost lost my temper with the interviewing board!)

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Manoj Atri
Age: 46

CACB can charge an applicant if it's a new university they have not verified. But once they have verified a certain university to charge the same amount is not fine, they can average out the number of certification and come up with a more reasonable account.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Carole
Age: 36

So long as there is some sort of accreditation process of the international educations.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: chris
Age: 31

what are you asking here exactly? this makes no sense.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Maissaa
Age: 38

the cost of CACB certification is extremely high for internationally educated architects, not only we have to pay for translation , but also a legal notary service certification is required for all our documents. that doesn't mean that a university certification will solve the problem because as we all know , universities here are "self fininacially supported" , eventually they will ask architects to do more courses to get them-universities I mean- having more business

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: nomada
Age: 37

Any initiative to use existing resources to the benefit of interns should be used. Nevertheless it should not degenerate into lax requirements. We should never loose sight that this is about building the future of the profession.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: ginfaxi
Age: 32

Sounds good, as long as a reasonable standard of checking is maintained and it is ensured that internationally trained professionals have a degree that meets the very stringent requirements of the CACB certified degrees.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: KMTG
Age: 36

Again, it is so important that we do this. We keep talking about enabling immigrants to get work in their professions and yet we make it almost impossible for them to achieve any equivalency with their Canadian-born/educated peers. Not only are the costs exorbitant to get degrees accredited right now, but there are so many hoops to jump through in terms of documenting school experience regardless of how much experience a person might have.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Len Abelman
Age: 37

I find the current process very fair.I studied in South Africa and graduated from University of Natal, Durban in 1994. As no-one in Canada had ever heard of this program or the courses they offer I was invited to provide details and display my work to a CACB committee at an interview where they liked what they saw and approved it. To leave this process up to clerical staff at Universities, especially where politics could get involved, could create an unbalanced standard.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Hector Romero
Age: 52

It seems that not recognizing Studies from other universities or verifying those, are the way to control and certified that the work is done correctly, but sometimes (and it is my case), we are doing better job, or at least similar jobs than architects graduated from canadian schools but being paid less and not allowed to sign for the projects. I really recommend to review each case and give to each intern the chance through the sponsors and menthors, to certified their jobs and allow to be an Certified Architect. Yes the cost is very high and we have to open the door for more possibilities.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Martin M. Poizn
Age: 73

One caution would be to ensure that the universities don't become the "borfer patrol" and expand their mandate.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Amal
Age: 30

THE COST IS THE IMMIGRANT FIRST BARRIER

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Issam A Shukor
Age: 47

Standards of practice, materials and methods, philosophy of teaching, approaches to Architecture differ from country to another. While public safety is of importance in Canada, foregin universities might pay little attention to that aspect. However I noticed that foreign-trained professionals are not satisifed with the existing certification procedures until they practice in Canada for a number of years.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: Helma
Age: 39

From what I understand : CACB is in always in dire need of funds for its existance and is supported by provincial regulators like OAA etc for its existance. Fees from forign credential assessment are a major form of revenue generating way for CACB. Instead of piggibacking and burdening immigrants indivisually ins't it a good idea for CACB to approve foreign universities and colleges in principal and than accept their graduates at the same cost as Canadian counterparts? (Note: Migration is one major source of revenue for Canada)

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: hhawa
Age: 49

For the time being, graduates from the same university at the same graduation year should submit the full study curriculum for CABC to check!! This is a waste of time and money. By now, CABC should have a full list of approved curricula from hundreds of international universities according to the year of graduation.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: TinWolf
Age: 35

The Architectural profession in Ontario has to wake up to the fact that the immigration population has become the majority in the professional community. While degrees for doctors, pharmacist, nurses, accountants, engineers, etc are already being recognized from as far away places as India we are still under this "provincial" belief that some how our territory is unique and superior. It's a brain-drain. The only problem is that the sink is already empty. INCENTIVES...INCENTIVES...INCENTIVES

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: toni2
Age: 29

I think charging the academic institution to be certified is more fair than charging the individual, but the option for either should be there.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: erin
Age: 26

If we are requiring international students to catch up on a few canadian courses at canadian universities, are we not already accepting their qualifications in order to let them do this? If we truly need more architects we need more transit for other countries. Perhaps we could establish relationships with international schools, so there would be a standardized transistion process for their grads? And each year we could work on establishing more 'deals' with more schools?

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: eleanor
Age: 34

If it is deemed that an internationally-trained architect's degree does not meet a Canadian standard of certification, it is a great subsequent cost to them to upgrade their educations. Should make this initial step more accessible.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: Daryl Christia
Age: 32

Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials advocates about Assessment of Foreign Credentials : Fees: The fee for the evaluation of foreign credentials should be kept as low as possible. When possible, special measures aimed at persons with limited income and other disadvantaged groups should be considered in order to ensure that no applicant is prevented from seeking assessment or recognition of his or her foreign credentials because of the cost involved. In the need to promote fair, credible, and standardized methods in the assessment of foreign credentials Is it fair to burden newly migrated families with exorbitant cost of 1300+ $ just for educational equivalency? Be fair Ontarions!! Be fair!!

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: catiasplace
Age: 26

I believe the people should at the very least have to option to approach a recognized University for certification. I understand that the higher cost of certification for Non-Canadians is to deter them for the sake of giving work to Canadian Architects but I think a little competition can be healthy. This can also open up better relations with countries abroad since Canadian Architects also do (or wish to do) work elsewhere.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: Katherine
Age: 28

$1300 is an outrageous amount. It is already costly enough to have to have (in some case) all required documents translated and then wait, and wait, and wait some more. I think getting local universities involved in the process is a great idea.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: feedmyego
Age: 26

CABC is doing a fine job on this already. translation costs should be at applicants expense. however, CABC should be creating some sort of database of their own of foreign schools from whom most foreign applicants apply (ie. the AA in london, or MIT in the states...these are well recognized english speaking schools whose standars are quite high)

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: OlaM
Age: 26

The board should work with other countries to establish certification standards to aid the accreditation process for Canadians to be certified abroad.

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: Bill Birdsell
Age: 49

If standards of review can be maintained

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: intern4ever
Age: 40

Anything that can make it less costly is good.

Date:  Mar 21, 2008
User: archipunjabi
Age: 32

People who recently move to Canada and probably don't even have a proper job, that is a lot of money to ask for Evaluation. Another thing, I moved from US to Canada, I had my education evaluation done from EESA (which is equivalent of CACB in US) paid $850 for that. However, when I moved to Canada I asked if my education evaluation from EESA will be acceptable, the answer was plain no. You have to have CACB certification, Another $1300 plus money for certification of every degree and marksheets from a Notary. I did it because I had no choice but wished it was not that stringent

Date:  Mar 22, 2008
User: alan
Age: 34

I agree. However, reducing the cost does not address the fact that many internationally trained professionals (ITP's) are already qualified architects in their respective countries and have finished their university education many years previously. Obtaining their university information can be difficult or impossible resulting in the ITP losing confidence and changing profession. Reducing the $1300 certification fee is helpful but it does not resolve the problem.

Date:  Mar 24, 2008
User: filippo
Age: 43

Are all degrees created equal?

Date:  Mar 25, 2008
User: Torontonian
Age: 27

Reduce the cost and clear bottleneck at the very entry to the many aspiring!!

Date:  Mar 25, 2008
User: D. Cardinal
Age: 34

I would want to ensure the quality of the profession is maintained at the highest levels.

Date:  Mar 25, 2008
User: gilbert
Age: 28

The cost should be to the applicant, not the association.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: david agro
Age: 44

Certification costs money and it needs to be done. Certification of education and experience in other juridictions will take time and effort, and presumably someone gets paid to do that work.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: alexis
Age: 40

As programs vary greatly the verification of qualifications for certifying international architects (out of the existing reciprocity agreement) should be on an applicant by applicant basis. With our field education occurs both in school and on the job, and all should be considered.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: donb
Age: 55

it took me over six months to get an appointment with the group of architects who had to determine whether my MArch at UCLA GSAUP was acceptable. I had to provide transcripts, course outlines etc, in itself a huge undertaking (with costs involved) while working full time as an intern architect. At the time, UCLA was ranked third in the US for grad programs in architecture. Because I had to wait so long to be drilled by team of architects about my education, I lost the ability to log about a year of experience. This set-back is the key reason why I never completed my process to licensing. The whole process was just too onerous for a woman at the time of life when I was balancing career, new motherhood, etc.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: Garry
Age: 56

There are many people in Canada who are trained in architecture and related disciplines in foreign shcools. I see many of them in the architectural technology field. We need to have a central data base of information about such institutions. Given that responsibility for immigration rests with the federal government, they should be approached to fund a suitable solution.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: erin
Age: 25

I think reducing the cost is a good idea, but I don't know how well certifying schools from other countries would go.

Date:  Mar 29, 2008
User: ar-cad
Age: 40

the CACB fees is way too high.

Date:  Mar 29, 2008
User: Cory Stechyshyn
Age: 44

This role should be fulfilled through the RAIC Syllabus program,which is historically why the program exists. The Syllabus can evaluate foreign student / graduate / architect experience and education and establish what training is required. The trianing can be obtained through a variety of sources including the RAIC Syllabus and Canadian Universities or Colleges.

Date:  Mar 29, 2008
User: mustafa
Age: 35

architecture all over the world is different and every one learns in the field and school i strongly agree that architecture method is different in Canada but design concept is same so i dont think degree need to be certified is yes if for immigration purpose you want to do it you can but i dont agree i am working in architecture company for the past two years its just long process but it doenst effect my ability i dont think its required

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: Meshah
Age: 39

CACB must not charge the same amount for evaluating course outlines from a foreign university that has been previously scanned. It is just ridiculous what immigrants are expected to pay and submit for accreditation. Since most of the foreign universities by now are on their database the overall cost must be reduced.

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: r2co
Age: 36

Having worked for a university, mistakes are commonplace and accountability is non-existent. We expect more from ourselves and should be treating possible applicants with a level of professionalism that you will not find in university administration.

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: hector
Age: 36

CACB takes too much time, having the papers translated by U of T wont make them speed... 1300$ is too much

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: Raje
Age: 46

Isnt U of T qualified enough? Reasoning makes absolute sense.Also once you certify a foreign school, why do you charge again to certify the same school for another candidate.

Date:  Apr 02, 2008
User: Denise Lepage
Age: 49

Universities have a vested interest in recruiting students to their institution to take their courses. I am not convinced that their process would be in the best interest of students and may actually be more restrictive to individuals than the CACB.

Date:  Apr 02, 2008
User: Masato
Age: 35

The time and cost for Non-Canadian is extremely high as it is.

Date:  Apr 05, 2008
User: 1hk1
Age: 37

$1300? You must be joking! It cost about $150 in the US to have a degree certified by a third party.

Date:  Apr 06, 2008
User: kite
Age: 40

The currently process is very costly and time consuming for Non-Canadians. Profitable bussiness?

Date:  Apr 07, 2008
User: __ap
Age: 28

What exactly are 'Canadian Standards'; are they ARE or ExAC? Let's establish that first.

Date:  Apr 09, 2008
User: wing nut
Age: 39

Sounds good, get on with it.

Date:  Apr 11, 2008
User: lida
Age: 41

As a person who has been experienced this process, my main concern wouldn't be only the cost, but beyond that what is really imoportant is time which you can never buy. It took me more than 2 years and half since I have submitted my documents to CACB until I passed my courses(just 2)and get my certification. If you want to add the time which I put to gather those documents you shouldn't never start this process!, and these are all happening while you are considered as a licensed Architect in your country!!!

Date:  Apr 14, 2008
User: toronto_intern
Age: 37

CACB does not have consistant policy for evaluating foreign architectural degress, for example me and 2 of classmates got 3 differnet resolutions eventhough we have finished from the same school of architecture and at the same year, one got certified, the other with a requirement to finish proffessional practice course, and the other was required to finish 2 professional practice courses

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: typern
Age: 35

CACB certification of Non-Canadian architectural degrees it is necessary as the syllabus of each university is different. The costs may be lower as long as the syllabus of a university is known by previous applications from the same university.

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: markazi
Age: 54

LETS PAVE THE ROAD

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: evelyn
Age: 33

I would like to see a break down of the $1300 cost - before I can comment.

Date:  Apr 17, 2008
User: cos/tan
Age: 50

Maybe the solution is a compromise: have a certification process where the committee includes members of CACB and provincial universities with architectural programs. The ratio between these members can be adjusted for a fair, effective and relevant evaluation.

Date:  Apr 21, 2008
User: j3norman
Age: 25

There are very few architecture schools in Canada that many Canadian students have no choice but to go to an American school. I don't think I nor others should be punished for this with additional fees. We are already having to pay an extreme amount of money for international tuition.

Date:  Apr 24, 2008
User: ravk
Age: 32

MY only concern would be regarding the variation in the fees for candian educated person versus a foreign trained professional. I have met a lot of people when they come to Canada, they just get discouraged by the amount of money they as forein student would have to spent initailly ,when they are just struggling for a job or even doing voluntary work. I'm not very clear as to what is the basis for such dramatic difference in the fees for a foreign educated person.

Date:  Apr 26, 2008
User: Chris
Age: 38

I suspect that this is a more complex issue than the initial presentation. I would be surprised if UofT's database would offer reliable applicability to schools of architeture. If it does, I see no reason not to use it - but this issue will only grow in importance here (and in the US) - there may be a way to pool the intelligence of the AIA and other international bodies with more resources or more experience with international schools. There will coninue to be a case-by-case need.

Date:  Apr 26, 2008
User: senior
Age: 53

Certification of foreign Architecture schools by commonwealth association is in place may be somone can elaborate on this further. I know this was happening in 90's. In my opinion if institution is recognised by International association & is credible verification of individual's certification must be done independently.

Date:  Apr 28, 2008
User: rima
Age: 41

It is important to maintain a comprehensive non-biased and professional review and assessment process that is directly under the scrutiny of CACB, rather than adding another level of breaucracy that could increase time requirements and potentially even cost. Cost of cerification is a big factor, but it is a hard one to go around. One way to reduce cost, is by reducing the intensity of the review process once a certain university, and a certain year is reviewed once. This can be achieved by maintaining an up-to-date data base of all international universities going through the certification process on a year-by-year basis, and then determining fees based on the institution and year of graduation of applicant and whether sufficient information is already, in this data base.

Date:  May 03, 2008
User: Dacad
Age: 58

Systemic racism taking place here. This place (this is a country?) is founded by rejects from Europe (garbage). You cannot expect fairnes from genetical garbage.

Date:  May 06, 2008
User: Tmac
Age: 37

The rest of the licensing procedure should be enough to qualify the interns ability. We have architects licensed in other countries in limbo here because of the cost of degree accreditation, with exams etc pending after that. No incentive.

Date:  May 15, 2008
User: S.B.G.
Age: 25

Assuming the recognized University certification is sufficiently guided as to the standards appropriate and necessary for the architecture practice (in Canada), I believe reducing cost and handing over certification to a service better equipped and experienced in doing so, is a good idea.

Date:  May 15, 2008
User: Shirley Ting
Age: 32

I agree, there are some non Canadian architects who are even more credible architects than the Canadian counterparts and who actually care more about the profession and about becoming an architect and representing what an architect is.

Date:  May 30, 2008
User: H.H.
Age: 33

Architecture in Canada - both the work and the profession - will be better served by a diversity of architects from around the world.

Date:  Jun 02, 2008
User: SK_C
Age: 38

Cost and more the time taken by the committee to meet and recommend upgrades, which is frustrating.

Date:  Jun 11, 2008
User: leadfoot
Age: 40

They have chosen to have an education elsewhere and want to come here to practice....it will cost money to review and verify their education.

Date:  Jul 20, 2008
User: edcuhaci
Age: 78

try to reduce cost to applicant

Date:  Jul 30, 2008
User: Licutus of Borg
Age: 45

If I want to work in another country, then I should learn the language and familiarize myself with the culture.

Date:  Aug 21, 2008
User: sonya
Age: 33

The proposed solution is an improvement. Was there a rationale for the high fee? For the sake of comparison, in England they expect candidates to use their university projects to demonstrate a schedule of criteria to a jury.

Date:  Aug 22, 2008
User: elizabeth
Age: 57

I had assumed that foreign-trained architects were certified to the same standards as Canadians. It sounds like this is not the case, although I may have misunderstood the statement. In any event, we should certainly be looking for the lowest cost approach - I presume that the alternatives are of equal quality; in fact it is ridiculous that we should be assuming this burden if we can pay some other group to do it better at a lower cost!!! We will still remain ultimately responsible for the certification (if we wish). In any event, the best approach, would be to integrate the new architects into the workplace asap, and to, through the on-going educational program, ensure that they receive, aculturation and tech upgrades to suit Cn circumstances - the faster the better.

Date:  Sep 28, 2008
User: Poet of Bithyni
Age: 33

I am an Architect, Canadian Citizen since 1981 and having had all of my schooling here in Canada, except for my Architecture degree I am still unable to find any work whatsoever. I am unable to provide $1300 to have my degree certified from an overseas certified university. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY WES (WORLD EDUCATION SERVICES)EVALUATION SHOULD NOT BE RECOGNIZED; AS MY DEGREE & CREDENTIALS ARE ALREADY SCREENED BY THEM.

Date:  Oct 06, 2008
User: joelb
Age: 34

I mildly disagree because I think we should be fostering 'home grown' architects first before non-canadians. Obviously economic conditions come into play. But as this relates to architects' fees, I can't help but wonder if the laws of supply and demand still apply: if there are fewer architects, shoudn't our fees go up? Why would we want to open the profession up and flood our market, allowing if every Tom, Dick, and Harry to practice? Aren't we trying to avoid the situation of driving fees down because of so much competition? This one needs more thought for me.

Date:  Mar 22, 2009
User: jimes
Age: 32

Costs that high are a deterrent and should be reduced. Foreign students and programs should be evaluated for their content, as it applied to Canadian expectations and standards.