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

Architecture can be an extremely busy and high pressure career, that requires much more time after hours than possibly any other profession. The burden of deadlines is arbitrary, and adds to this pressure - which is significant if one also has family to support, etc.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: sarah
Age: 30

I think more than 1 year of experience should be required. And if an intern chooses to do the ARE (I think most will), 5 years may not be enough time.

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

I would consider the time frame to be 6 years for some interns who become parents.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: akramer
Age: 30

What about interns who would like to be an architect, but require a more flexible framework? To be able to have a small practice, or part-time, or to pursue a graduate degree but retain professional ties...the intern should be able to continue their professional journey without losing the support of the professional association. Perhaps there could be a way to remain an architect, even if not currently practicing...to be able to take time away from the practice to have a family or develop a related creative endeavor.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: archkelly
Age: 26

As long as interns are paying their dues, the ones who are serious about joining the profession soonest will complete their internship within five years... those who cannot should not suffer by losing their hours after 5 years however because perhaps they are gaining valuable experience in competitions, etc that will strengthen their position as a future architect.

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

Ridiculous. Especially if you do not remove the requirement for multiple building type experience. Some infrastructure projects are 5 years in length.

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

Firstly, the requirement should be much more than 1 year and an outer time limit would eliminate the 'lifers' and allow for extenuating circumstances affecting completion, say, 8 years. 8 years is more than the average amount of time it takes currently for interns to become licenced.

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

1 year recorded experience is not enough.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: miug
Age: 55

It is tough to work all day and ocassionally most of the nights and preparing for the exams. The time limit will impose unwarranted additional pressure to complete the process.

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

Why would the system want impose time limitations when the onus to succeed is on the intern.

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

First year students in an architecture program may not be serious about the profession, but someone who completes the gruelling education, and becomes an intern is serious about becoming a full time member. I've been employeed in the profession for 10 years, does the fact that I haven't been able to complete all my exams because of work load and other commitments mean that I'm not serious?

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

I feel there should be some connection between time of graduation and time of enrollment in program. I'm not sure of the solution, but I have a problem with grad who waits several years to enroll (and will then request some sort dispensation for work completed outside the program).

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: smcc
Age: 33

What are the statistics on women in the profession? 5 years may not be long enough if they are pursuing their exams and having children. Maybe there should be a limit but it is longer. 1 year of experience is too short - i would rather see more experience categories/ time and less exams.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: k_clark
Age: 31

Possible issues: - Gaining the experience required if there is an economic downturn. - Not being able to write the exams until after 2 years of experience leaves only 3 years for the exams instead of 5. - What if a women gets pregnant/is at home with her child and is unabale to complete the experience or exam portion?

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: Chod
Age: 38

Placing a five-year time limit will also help define an intern's career path.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: Rem Koolhaas
Age: 30

IT WOULD BE COMPLETELY UNFAIR TO CAP AN INTERN'S TIME TO COMPLETE THEIR INTERNSHIP!!!! NCARB already has a cap, why should the association who wants us to be lifetime professional members (and pay high membership fees) limit how long it takes to develop one's professional skills. Let's get to the root of this: Does the OAA hate babies? Come on, at some point, we may all get occupied with making babies....

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

Time is measurable, commitment isn't. Time restrictions will only create more problems for everybody.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: daniel
Age: 57

There should be no time limit.

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

DO NOT IMPOSE THE REQUIREMENT TO COMPLETE THE EXAMS IN A FIVE YEAR OR ANY TIME SPAN PERIOD! The profession has no right to impose this timeline on individuals who may at any time encounter a misfortunate life occurance or just simply need more time to get on with their lives. Life is definitely more stressful these days and more costly. The profession must provide a healthy environment for individuals to develop at their own pace. Phillip Johnson wrote his exams 6 times before successfully completing them.

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

Unlimited time is ridiculous. Extenuating circumstances must always be supported. Life isn't black and white. I like what this revision will do.

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: evanrutten
Age: 33

I find one year experience too short and 5 years enrollment without the potential to reapply absolutely too short & not just (see answer 8). On the contrary - if the concern is 'seriousness', I would let interns linger as interns (and I am an intern) - until they are ready to take the exam. You would then be sure that they are committed, rather than making them feel like they have to get it done in the time frame and find out you have a bunch of uncommitted architects running around!!

Date:  Mar 17, 2008
User: cahandy
Age: 30

Ridiculous! This would not reflect the exigencies of real life and be excessively unfair. Totally unnecessary.

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

since there is no study material, and no one can discuss the exams results. I will give a life example: I passed all my exams but one about 5 years ago, I wrote the last exam 10 times so far, I got very familiar with the questions that I found 2 wrong questions and answers, to make long story short, NCARB thanked me and withdraw those questions, I am still not passing the last one. I have 23 years of experience almost half of it in Canadian Architectural firms. any comments ??????

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: gigi
Age: 28

No....I don't think people sign up as Intern without being serious. WHY put this extra strain, I don't think the reason people are taking more than they 5 years is because there is not a limit, but there must be an administration problem and status recognition overall. Many don't get their license b/c they don't need it as a employer. If office don't recognize the difference what is the point.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: tesark
Age: 34

The burden of turning a serious intern into a licensed architect should be shared by the intern and the employer. It seems that currently the onus is mostly on interns to complete their internship, with little incentive for those not intending to practice independently. Other models do exist, for example, the articling period for law students. Their employer and their governing body work together with the students to ensure that the articling period is comprehensive and time-limited.

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

However, one must always have the exemption possibility for special cases - especially in case of 'hardship.'

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

I am an intern currently overseas and can not apply for full licence because of Ontario currency of 6 months regulation. I work abroad for a canadian architectural and engineering company and in order to get the licence I have to go back and work for a minimum of 6 months in an Ontario project. So therefore I strongly dissagree to loose the internship status as proposed.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: meredith
Age: 35

Many interns require time to start and raise families after they complete their studies. Many of my former classmates are also mothers now. Careers progress at different rates and as designers we should be able to work on a variety of projects without worry that it does not fall under the prescribed path to becoming an architect.

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

"Serious about joining the profession as full members"? Am I reading this correctly? May I ask each and every committee members how many people were registered in 5 years after enrollment? The question should be how is OAA going to assist interns to complete all licensure requirements in 5 years, not throwing a blanket statement like this is what all interns need to fulfill. Is there oppurtunity to combine licensure requirements into universities' courses, like medical professional do.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: evan
Age: 47

The consequence of not completing the ARExams in a timely fashion is borne by the intern. In 'regulating' this time frame, the OAA is accepting liabilities and responsibilities beyond those it already should be taking seriously but doesn't.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Daniele KSantos
Age: 32

For foreign trained professionals, married and with family, 5 years may not be enough time to complete all the additional education that CACB requires to have the equivalency of studies.

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

Again all the timings and requirements are not well conceived and irrelevant. if the courses, exams, experience, classes taking both full time and part time are properly coordinated the pattern with proper time frames will all follow. First streamline the process.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Helen Desjardin
Age: 49

To not allow someone to reapply for Intern status seems to be harsh. If that person is willing to do the work a second time, where is the harm in allowing them to try again?

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

And you are trying to keep interns interested and involved in this profession? NO TIME LIMIT! Offer incentives for finishing early or in a certain period of time. If you are attempting to fertilize the profession-don't start with Eunuchs.

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

There are many life paths. While endless procrastination has it's tortures, being able to choose when to do the exams and how to work them around the other parts of life is very important. These sorts of things usually unduly punish people who choose to have children, especially women. It was my understanding that that was why the time limit was lifted. I would strongly disagree with this.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Daniel Gaito
Age: 58

Perhaps a bit more flexibility with timing. 5 years seems a lot, but for women architects, who must feel welcome in the profession for the long run, career vs possible maternity leaves should not become an unreasonable conflict.

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

there should'nt be a time frame for getting the license done, not all interns want to be licensed. this way you are shutting the way completely, because to go through the process every 5 years is very exhausting , some people could have other life responsibilities that stops them from proceeding into getting their license for sometime but will eventually continue sometime later whenever they have the chance to do this, & that can never be linked with time frame (2-5....etc years) if I'm a student & want to decide to study in the university I would never choose a profession that would make my life so complicated because I have a nightmare every 5 years!! instead, licensure procedure should be made more "Architects Friendly".

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Grant Oikawa
Age: 27

Although the economy is fairly strong now, this will not always be the case (read: the eighties), in the event that an intern becomes unemployed and cannot find employment within the 5 year period, he/she would not be able to continue with the intern architect program. This is especially significant as 1 year experience does not seem adequate. Your possible solution seems extreme as it would negate 6 years (a minimum of $35,000) of education by not allowing an individual to reapply for Intern status. It is the individuals choice to continue with the Intern Architect program; any decision to postpone this process should not limit their ability to reapply for intern status. This does not mean that the process needs to have an open-ended timeframe, but rather if the process is not completed within the designated time, the individual should have to reapply as for intern status and start the process of recording of hours over again.

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

5 years is fair.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: lkasawat
Age: 40

It is reasonable as long as there is a way out. Interns should be allowed to re-enter the process after a penalty is served, maybe one year and restart the process. However to fully deprive them of being an architect is not a healthy way to go.

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

The title of Intern Architect does not describe the reality of the job that most interns preform. They may never become architects, but the transitional connotations of the word intern implies unfinished business, and a reasonable (and limited) timeframe would help to distinguish between Interns and Architectural Staff. Maybe this is part of the reason that internal training is bad in offices, because all non-architect staff tend to be interns and are regarded int he same manner. The title of Intern should be a cue to architects that these people are willing, interested and ready to learn. However, I don't have a suggestion for provision for the core of very capable and knowledgeable Interns who are the heart of many offices; there should be a clear and respecatable title given to this role.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Michele
Age: 39

An unfeasible and unreasonable time linit given all the demands and uncertainties that people today have in life.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Peggy Theodore
Age: 41

What options if any will be available to current interns who have been interns for 10 years plus? These interns should not be penalized but offered an opportunity to complete their licensure requirements within the proposed 5 year time frame.

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

I agree that a time limit is a good idea. However, since I believe the experience requirement should be longer than 1 year, I think the overall time required for licensure should probably be longer than 5 years.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Jacqueline
Age: 49

People have lots of reasons for not joining the OAA within the 5 years. These may include illness (which delayed my application), children, job choices, etc. The only reason I can see for the OAA to make people join in a set time frame is to get them paying the OAA fees! If the Con Ed is a big concern, then make a Con Ed requirement, not a licensing requirement. Let people join when they are ready!

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

My case has been a real one. I am working in an Engineer firm doing architectural design and work, and I have not been able switch to an architecrtural firm to complete my required experiences hours eventhough I am doing the job for an Architect. I am appling to different companies, but still nothing serious. To put me into period of time is killing me.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Nadine El-Gazza
Age: 30

This time restriction applies too much pressure on Interns to complete the licensure in a time period that may not be appropriate for them. Some interns may need more time to learn the practice than others. I would allow more time if you require 2 years of experience rather than just one year of experience. I personally think 1 year of experience is not enough. I would prefer to see 2 years as the requirement, with at least 3 chances to take the exams, and one extra year to provide room for error.

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

Not clear enough. I disagree with a 5 year automatic cut off. There should be a requirement to be interviewed and to explain the reason for the delay, but not a blanket denial after 5 years.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: dgignac
Age: 20

5 years may be a bit short. 8 or 10 would be better. A time limit would ensure that those in the architectural field are of a certain quality, rather than just working in it because they have nothing better to do. This would ensure they have every intention of actually becoming certified, and that they have the dedication necessary in such a distinguished and culturally affecting field. Quality should prevail and can only be ensured when those creating buildings are dedicated. Those who wish to remain as interns forever would be better off as architectural technicians where they're not in perpetual limbo.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Tracey Winton
Age: 42

I believe there should be lots of flexibility in the timeframe to accommodate people with complex circumstances, especially women (and men) raising children, but also those who are involved simultaneously in teaching, graduate studies, have an extremely demanding workload, experience illness, or have other commitments.

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

WIDEN YOUR HORIZONS PLEASE!

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

Leaving the profession for some time is not because Interns are not "serious" but because of many other reasons. time limitation makes it rigid for many people, I think anf might deprive them the opportunity.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: J. Denis Seguin
Age: 50

Being from Gen X it was our goal to register ASAP...I find the process now to be so relaxed that we now have this problem. THis needs to be clear at the University level also and instilled into the graduates.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: daniel
Age: 43

Licensing is expensive and unnecessary unless one wished to bea sole practitioner. A 5 year time limit would only drive away interns who might otherwise have qualified earlier. I thought this process was about reducing the barriers to interns becoming licenced - not increasing them.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: mcamp
Age: 27

The time limit would not work if the required experience does not change. 7 years may be more appropriate. For interns who have family and financial responsibilities it still seems like an uphill battle.

Date:  Mar 18, 2008
User: Archie
Age: 29

"5 Year completion period"? Sniff Sniif, I smell another cash grab coming to get back in the fold! Your reasoning is counter intuitive. People who are serious about joining the profession will complete the licensure without a time cap.

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

Time limit is very frustrated for a woman who needs to be a profession, a full-time employer and a good mother at the same time, especially for a mother of two or a mother-will-be.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: steve
Age: 32

Sorry but this is a joke, they would basically be putting a gun to your head to finish within the five years. I don't think this would increase the total licensed membership at all, and would just decrease the number of interns, causing further frustration within the profession.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: intern007
Age: 51

If real assistance is given and and the process fair then this will encourage interns to qualify then no time limit is really required as they will be happy to become memebers. However, currently some who really want ot be members struggle with time and costs so to cut them off completely is unfair

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: S. DeMatos
Age: 29

"Individuals may not reapply for Intern status". -I'm not sure if this is a good idea.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: Kori
Age: 38

What stops anyone from NOT becoming an Intern, yet STILL continuing to work for years and years in an architectural firm (ie. this is still like the Intern syndrome)?? The possible solution is a good idea, but maybe it needs to extend to making the decision to become an Architect upon graduation from a University? The law and medical professions do not seem to have this problem. Perhaps we should look closer at their models? There also needs to be financial incentive to becoming a licensed Architect at the employer's level. Making the same salary before and immediately after becoming licensed is entirely unacceptable and actually diminishes this entire process.

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

The Timeframe is not what keeps interns from being architects. It's the tiresome experience process and the lack of any "brass ring" incentive.

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

People have different agendas / schedules - especially women who might take time off to raise children. They are not any less serious about being an Architect. There should be no barriers / penalties to going back at their own pace as long as they fulfill all requirements.

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

I agree with a time limit, but recognition should be made for student associate hours to be placed outside this limit - the count should begin at registration as an Intern (after graduation).

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: doug pollard
Age: 63

There are so many circumstances (starting families is one of them) that it seems silly to me to suggest everyone get on with it within 5 years and to dissallow someone to keep trying It seems as well that many who decide late decide because they are the most serious after having explored other options in the interim. I was a mentor in the syllabus program for some time and met any number of "late bloomers" from Canada and abroad who were determined to get registered. Spending a decade at that pursuit sure indicated seriousness to me.

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

what if i want to have a family. two kids in two years eats severely at my time to complete the program...were any women involved in this proposal? also: i know why this was proposed: and the committee even stated it in the opening to this whole survey: the OAA is concerned with how many interns there are in the program (when there could be more architects paying architect fees!)...what a better way to reduce the numbers without much effort!! did anyone ever just think that the process is by its nature a long one (3 years experience, a multitude of tests)? i think putting a time limitation into effect whithout even a chance for reapplication is a scary one.

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

Only if the experience requirements are reduced to 1 year,unless it would be very tight.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: holly
Age: 25

Not fair for women who may wish to pause their career to raise a family.

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

I agree with a time frame on licensure requirements, but five years may not be enough. Perhaps six to eight years may be more appropriate. Has there been a recent survey that identifies the average time frame that it takes one to become licensed?

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

There is no need to add this restriction. What about maternity leave, working abroad, long term disability? This is not a constructive idea.

Date:  Mar 19, 2008
User: Shawn
Age: 36

What happens after 5 years?

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: Rufina
Age: 27

Adding more pressure may turn even more people away from joining the profession.

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: Nikki
Age: 47

This solution and 'reasoning' reflects a negative attitude towards interns - that interns are lazy and not serious about joining the profession. They clearly do not understand or are unwilling to understand the issues facing interns and the profession today, and wish to blame the very people that the profession should be trying to attract. I have seen all manner of abuse of interns from employers in firms from unpaid overtime, exploiting foreign workers to being fired for becoming pregnant. There is no recourse for these individuals, who fear reprisal and boycott by other employers for going public and there is no protection from the OAA. There are too many firms that do not pay attention to business principles and practices that would make their workplaces attractive or helpful to interns. The profession is severly lacking in business knowledge and 'professionalism' that could benefit from a win-win relationship by investing in their interns. This is the largest impediment to intern growth, registration and to the health of the profession as a whole.

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

Some people do not do well on tests, but perform well in a work environment. Relying on testing as the only method of determining competency is unfair.

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: Nathalie
Age: 41

5 years is too short if one takes any detours (start a family, opportunity abroad, difficulty with testing, personal problems). These detours do not necessarily reflect a lack of commitment. Also, in a recession, it might take longer to collect the necessary experience. When I graduated (in NY) in 1991, out of 65 students, 3 of us got full time positions in an architecture office. Somewhere between 7 and 10 years might be a compromise.

Date:  Mar 20, 2008
User: Acer
Age: 45

This is the single-most mis-guided idea I have ever heard on this topic! First, the minimum 3 years of recorded experience should NOT be reduced. With that in mind, 5 years is NOT enough time for everyone to complete the process: what of those interns who elect to take time off to, say, have kids, or take a hiatus to pursue some other once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.... This issue is especially important now that (almost?) all Canadian architecture schools are graduate programs, meaning that most people gradute in their late 20's or early 30's - exactly that period of life when they begin thinking about having kids, buying a house, taking up a new interest, volunteering for community service.... Second, I thought the idea was to make it EASIER for people to complete the licensure requirements. Why make it MORE difficult by placing a time restraint on the process? Third, what difference does it make how long a person takes? Taking a long time in no way harms the OAA or the profession. Also, I resent the idea that taking a long time means that I'm not "serious". This suggestion does nothing for the interns, for the OAA, or for the public (whose interests the OAA is meant to safeguard).

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

I agree but be cautious as I had to take a break because I had a baby, I see relief for circumstances but would prefer if their is relaxation in actual requirements for becoming an Architect

Date:  Mar 23, 2008
User: s z
Age: 35

I think the timing should be somewhat longer. 5 years from joining to completion seems quick, and may not allow an intern the comfort level or leeway to move positions or firms, consider their options, possibly explore other avenues, and take the exams without adding undue stress to what can be an extraordinarily demanding schedule at many practices when there are tight deadlines or numerous projects. Furthermore, becoming licensed does not necessarily offer any benefit for many members, and perhaps this needs to be examined/addressed first.

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

Is a Teaching Architect considered to be more or less serious about Architecture than a Practicing one? Make it easier for more members to become Licensed and this will inturn make the Association stronger. Disregard the fact that a member may wish to design Residential projects or Multi-Million dollar proejcts, or work part-time or full-time, every project is an important part of our built environment.

Date:  Mar 24, 2008
User: Ron Milne
Age: 74

I think the unlimited time should remain.

Date:  Mar 24, 2008
User: Derek Newby
Age: 35

A deadline makes the process serious. Perpetual internship is not a benefit to the profession, and it leads to cynicism. Consider the experience with engineers, doctors, lawyers - the fact that as an architect you can be an intern in perpetuity is a bit silly. Getting the license makes your relationship to the profession and public formal, and implies responsibility that benefits your work. Consideration for some type of parental extension should be given.

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

I have no opinion about what may come because I am already into the sysytem- giving ARE exams. My question is has a clear thought been given for easy transition of people who are already into the system? What credit do they get for their logged in hours/passed exams etc? If the exisitng interns are to follow the time clock how will the clock work for them?

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

A penalty is not addressing the true problem with interns completing licensure requirements. The OAA and the profession have to provide an incentive for interns to complete licensure.

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

The minimum time limit should be 10 years as there are complications and other factors that can affect ones life. Rushing the system will not help the profession.

Date:  Mar 26, 2008
User: intern
Age: 35

I agree that it is good to have some time limit, but the lengthy internship is not just because of the intern not willing to complete the internship in a timely fashion, but also the employer not willing to give their interns the experience they need. What OAA should have done is encourage and recognize those employers willing to help interns in their licensing process, rather than just setting a 5-year deadline assuming that interns are often the ones who delay the process.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: Gaby
Age: 26

i don't believe this would be a good idea, specially for females because if by this time she is lucky to pay and reach this stage, she is most likelly in the maternity phase at which point unlimited time to complete allows for a more balanced individual..

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: Nick Borcescu
Age: 36

My internship started in my 4th year of university - and continued for the 2yrs more that I was in school before going out and working full time. If a 5yr limit was imposed, I would have lost 2yrs because of school (despite being able to count in the 4 months of summer work as hours towards my internship) and only had 3yrs to complete the requirements. That is insufficient time, no matter what sort of hours and experience record would be required. I'd agree to a 10yr limit, that would be a bit more sensible.

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

Why is it that interns are taking so long to register? Why is the average age of interns so high? Why are there so few registered architects (relatively speaking)? Obviously, people (including me) are not registering for a reason. I know of several people from my class, who graduated into the recession of '91 and were not able to work in architecture for 5-7 years. The interesting thing is that most of us returned. So there ARE circumstances that affect what people do and they have nothing to do about whether they are serious about joing the profession.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: Robert
Age: 37

if you had one exam then it is reasonable otherwise you are being ridiculous about these draconian grab out of the air limitations on an industry purely saturated with limitations

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

Although I understand why you would want to put a time limit on the intern process. If the time limit is to truly be effective then we should have the exams as in the past, where all exams were sat in a weekend. If the time limit is placed on licensure then use the medical or legal template, not a permutation of our existing template.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: Caroline
Age: 31

Having spent 7 years in a school of architecture before completing my professional degree, I was eager, upon graduation, to move forward with aspects of my life which had been put off during that time. Building a family over the last few years has taken me away from the profession for an extended period of time, and certainly will again in the future. How will this 5 year limit affect those of us whose priorities are not aligned with a tunnel-vision approach to our professional lives. I imagine women practitioners will be more affected than men, just by the dynamics of who typically undertakes childcare. I would hardly call raising a young family extenuating circumstances, and yet, if this is MY priority, should I loose out on recognition of my training? Further, does it not behoove a professional organization to welcome members on a variety of terms, aiming for flexibility and accessibility in its relationships? Is the OAA striving to be an elitist group, or an inclusive one? I urge the OAA to develop strategies to retain more members, not discard those with varied priorities who choose a marginal path in the profession.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: Robert
Age: 42

If you put a 5 year limit, you will find that both the number of new Registered Architects and your number of Interms will both start dropping significantly.

Date:  Mar 27, 2008
User: AYoung
Age: 26

A time limit is reasonable but 5 years seems much too short.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: Mike15
Age: 30

In my opinion, the OAA does not realize the current realities interns have deal with. As a man, I feel ashamed that this "Possible Solution" could actually discriminate against women in the architecture profession, who want to balance a career and children. This limited time frame would create unneeded presure on interns and their families. If the OAA is serious about getting more women architects into the profession this "limited time" frame is not a viable solution. Interns with families do not have time to work all day and study in the evenings, and this at a much lower salary than in other professions. Many other profesions (lawyers, accountants) allow time for study during regular work hours with pay. I could continue but I have work to do but here are some suggestion that might help. 1. Increase in average pay for interns. 2. Mandatory paid time for study and test taking.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: Name with held
Age: 30

YOU HAVE THIS COMPLETELY BACKWARDS !!! No intern wants to drag this process out. To say the intern alone must pay the penalty by not getting licensed is PUNISHING THE VICTIM. If you want the intern to finish within a stipulated time then firms must have an incentive for cooperating or a punishment for NOT cooperating - a carrot AND a stick. What makes this problematic is those who say, "We can't tell them how to practice or run their business". I agree that finding the exact way to implement this would be difficult but the associations seem to enforce plenty of other things, look at the failed BCDN system, ConED, go read the disciplinary results. If the associations have the will to provide incentive AND enforce punishment, then the problem will be solved. And enforcement is the key. Anyone who has even seen the business side of this profession knows full well that any agreement is meaningless unless it can be enforced and enforced in a timely manner. Firms are part of the problem, they have to be part of the solution. PERIOD.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: Ctrl-Z
Age: 28

Everyone should be allowed to choose their own timelines. Only those that are driven will succeed to become architects.

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

This does not, I believe, give young women enough time,nor others with complex lives. If you need a cut-off perhaps 7 or 10 would be better. However, there are many, like myself, who consider themselves to be active participants in the world of architecture, though we are not licensed, for a variety of reasons. There used to b a graduate architect designation, which recognized our condition and relationship to the profession. I would love to proceed to licensing, but it seems too late for me. But not to be a part of the OAA, with it's connectivity to the world of ideas and practices that I engage in would be unfortunate, I believe I speak for many here. So this solution provides nothing for all of us...

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

One of the challenges here is to avoid an "all or nothing" approach. I have spoken with a number of intern architects who are unable to complete the process (not working in an appropriate situation - difficulties with the extensive series of exams, etc.). But, all of them are still do architectural work (perhpas in only one part of the profession). Several have expressed an interest in becoming a Licensed Technologist OAA precisely becasue they see this as a legitimate goal that may be easier to achieve than full status as an architect. This suggests to me that the OAA should consider additonal levels of certification, rather than forcing interns to either acquire the experience, pass the erxmas, or leave the profession.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: jmcginn24
Age: 28

Maybe there should be a time limit but longer than five years, A number of things can happen in five years, health issues, employment issues, limited inter office experience. I mean currently there is not time limit why not make if ten years or something not five. Theres already enough pressure on interns why create more. Implementing the five year time period is a good way to deter new interns

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: slk123
Age: 30

this would infact 'weed-out' those who are not serious about completing they're internship. However, perhaps a fee could be introduced to re-enroll. Banishing the person from any possibility of re-enrolling as an intern seems much too harsh.

Date:  Mar 28, 2008
User: Lesley
Age: 53

The fewer restrictions and obstacles the better.

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

What if I was to take a year or two to start a family then get back into the profession whole heartedly? Is that an extenuating circumstance? What if I decided to persue something else for a while and then went back to architecture? This should be up to the individual.

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

I would even encourage the IAP to consider a minimum of work experience each of the five years.

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

if a intern dont get the job in architecture feild and he is busy in family life he is new in canada looking for kids and family requirements he gets the job after 5 years so what will happen

Date:  Mar 30, 2008
User: Robert Eland
Age: 28

This affects interns who have job oppurtunities oversees and/or female interns who want to start a female interns that want to start a family. Also this may lower enrollment since prospective architects will wait until they are ready to proceed in the program. Many will just not enter, since they may work outside the construction industry during this period.

Date:  Mar 30, 2008
User: jmac
Age: 38

see comments above... I'm an intern for 15 years now. i don't have plans to EVER get registered however, I did complete my education and feel I have a right to have a relationship with the OAA even though it'll never be through registration. I pay my dues...so piss off.

Date:  Mar 30, 2008
User: Kristin S
Age: 30

I feel a time limit is a great way to motivate people but not allowing people to reapply may be a bit harsh. It could be made that in order to reapply you have to go through an interview process and explain the reasoning as to why you never completed and then start the process again from point 0.

Date:  Mar 31, 2008
User: holmwood
Age: 39

I disagree with not being able to reapply after 5 years at all. I suggest that if they have not completed all within 5 years, they have to start over. I agree with allowing extenuating circumstance for additional time to complete (such as maternity leave, foreign posting etc)

Date:  Mar 31, 2008
User: Ruth
Age: 26

Individuals should have the option to reapply for Intern status. I think 1 year of recorded experience is too little. There is a lot to learn.

Date:  Mar 31, 2008
User: Drawswell
Age: 52

To assume an intern is not serious about joining the OAA based on the amount of time it takes them to become licensed is insulting. Every case is unique. I started out earnestly in 1994 but due to employment difficulties (it was difficult to get any work then) and time commitments (family responsibilites) I had to put it on the back burner for a number of years, finally becoming licensed in 2002.

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: erin
Age: 24

why does the profession only want "full members"? broad life experience helps architects to operate competently. this exclusion implies that after 5 years, their education is worthless- which does not represent reality. five years may not be long enough for some to decide whether they wish to become licenced. maybe the 'fast-appliers' are really the immature and impulsive ones. why should people sacrifice all other commitments or avoid obligations unconditionally within this window? everyone has extenuating circumstances.

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

I do agree with recomending a 5 year cap on internship completion but strongly disagree with Interns not having a chance to extend the completion time, I think completion time should be able to extend, as a special consideration.

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: gbaxter
Age: 32

Sometimes the extra time is needed. As a new parent I was barely getting enough sleep to function at work let alone study and write exams for a year or so. Also this is predicated upon a watered-down experience regime. Maybe a financial cap or an increased annual fee after 5 years... but don't set arbitrary limits for no reason. Also if there is a downturn in the market then junior people may need to work in other fields for a period of time.

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

Is the decision to reduce the years of experience already made? If the time required does not change, 5 years may not be enough if the economy takes a turn for the worst.

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: Joyce
Age: 26

Interns have other goals, such as to start a family, and a 5 year restriction imposes an even more contrived process than what already exists. Isn't 6 years of education enough to prove an intern is serious?

Date:  Apr 01, 2008
User: crystal
Age: 25

You should be able to re-apply if you do not meet the deadline.

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

I balk automatically at these kinds of restrictions. Someone who has suffered a major illness, a death in the family, or other personal setbacks should not have to also suffer going hat in hand to beg to continue down the path of progress in their career because of arbitrary deadlines. I resent the implication that because I am not yet licensed within this time frame that I may not be "serious about joining the profession as a full member". Up until this initiative I thought the profession was not serious enough about having me join as a member.

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

I am a father now and my license is not as important as my family at this point. I love architecture, however I have written a couple of exams lately and the only time to study is around 4 AM before work, at the end of the day I am extremely tired. This is my own experience, how can a mother do it? If the time gets cut down it will make it impossible for Intern Architects with families. I take the profession seriously.

Date:  Apr 02, 2008
User: Jason
Age: 34

This is bullshit, especially when some of the NCARB exams are designed to fail you. Those of us who are enrolled, are serious about joining. If you implement this, the profession will surely die. Work deadlines make this sort of time frame too stressful, and hard to meet. Good luck. No one would reapply. Understand that the hatred for the OAA is very high right now, and I'm not just talking about myself.

Date:  Apr 04, 2008
User: dmesher
Age: 29

What about maternity/paternity leave? Would that be considered an extenuating circumstance? Five years is not a long time to have a couple of children in.

Date:  Apr 04, 2008
User: intern
Age: 37

It's already difficult enough to pass all 9 exams in a row. Putting any time frame on the intership program will not help. Interns have different & diverse needs once graduate. Some may just want to take time off to start a family, some may relocate to new city, or move back home and can not find jobs immediately. All these scenarios have different time frames & may not fit into the 5 yr proposed. In addition, once the 5yr limit expires, you are no longer an intern architect? I can imagine the OAA or other associations bombarded with uneccessary applications for extension of the time limit!

Date:  Apr 04, 2008
User: Michaela
Age: 39

As stated before... There should be no restriction on the time to complete. This discriminates against women who want to have children. Why do we continue to go in circles with these issues.

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

Imposing a time limit on interns adds additional stress to the whole process. How will economic downturns be handled? Sabbaticals? Time to raise a family? Time to care for a sick parent? Interns lives are complicated enough and do not need an additional deadline.

Date:  Apr 08, 2008
User: Chintan Virani
Age: 46

3 times may not be enough for person like me who needs to support university going boys. I know arguements and counter arguement about this, but that is what it is! I repeat, Re-taking of 1 failed exam after 6 months kills the momemtum, I will prefer to finish as soon as possible. why any restrictions in time frame to retake the exam?

Date:  Apr 08, 2008
User: R Hip
Age: 31

We just finished adding the Master requirement, so now we spend an extra 2-3 years in school. Seems we should be thinking about more time; not less.

Date:  Apr 09, 2008
User: geoff miller
Age: 32

I do not believe there should be a time limit. This is equivalent to punishing those interns who may delay getting registered for any number of reasons. Anyone who goes through the entire registration process, in whatever time frame, may be regarded as being 'serious about joining the profession'.

Date:  Apr 09, 2008
User: gejb
Age: 39

OAA simply has a transparent agenda of increasing its membership fees. It has become a body of questionable significance, especially in light of recent Bill 124 debate won for us by our colleagues ... the enginneers. Many have wondered if an amalgamation of both bodies would serve well, as it exists in Schools (architecture is in Dept. of Eng.). Validation of OAA should begin by recognizing that an architectural graduate (with a professional degree) should be as respected as much as a grad from med. school or law school. The OAA should also recognize that some interns in some offices have more responsibility and professionalism than registered members in other offices. Architecture as a profession needs to be nurtured not treated as a cash grab.... why am i doing this survey???

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

Crazy talk. Come join the free market and see how long it takes to get that experince, particulalry on the cusp of a recession.

Date:  Apr 10, 2008
User: marc
Age: 36

Sounds tight to me. Insert the purchase of a home and the birth of a child into this invigorating schedule, and you have One Screwed Intern.

Date:  Apr 10, 2008
User: deanna
Age: 28

As long as this proposal requires only one year of experience.

Date:  Apr 11, 2008
User: jcirka
Age: 52

This item has a focus on one item only: a short time frame for becoming licensed. Individuals have complex and diverse lives which may include further education, raising a family, illness, etc. Why place a deadline onto an individual's career schedule and their life choices?

Date:  Apr 11, 2008
User: jlhr
Age: 27

To bar people from the profession forever seems very harsh. There needs to be provisions to allow for extenuating circumstances. The OAA keeps examining why there are less women in architecture and so limiting the number of years and barring them from the profession if they don't finish in time certainly will add to the hurdles by women in architecture if they have children during that 5 year time frame.

Date:  Apr 11, 2008
User: jsbaker
Age: 35

The main thing preventing more interns from becoming registered is the perceived lack of utility in becoming licensed. Personally, the only thing being licensed would bring me is additional costs and additional continuing educational requirements. There just isn't much incentive. A time limit would provide an incentive, but would likely drive away just as many interns as it prodded into taking the exams.

Date:  Apr 11, 2008
User: rhizome
Age: 44

Doesn't seem unreasonable.

Date:  Apr 13, 2008
User: Koutsoulias
Age: 29

So far this is the most unrealistic proposal I have seen. To expect an individual to go through a minimum of 7 years of schooling, immediately followed by a strict 5 year time frame with 9 exams and thousands of very 'specific' logged hours is absurd. It will only burn members out or scare potential members away.

Date:  Apr 13, 2008
User: parallax_ca
Age: 42

time frame should not be an issue rather like the new license that cert. eng. techs can now be, why cannot the OAA have a "lesser" architect designation >> I myself did NOT pursue the "stamp" since I would have 1) fewer clients 2) the projects I worked on did not require them 3) I would have to charge more (the OAA "fee schedule" and yet I offer the same services as an architect yet I am UNRECOGNIZED by the OAA , I am a NON-ENTITY >> a cert.eng tech has more recognition by my profession and they are not even in my profession (i.e. so many years UNIVERSITY training etc.!!) I realize I sound harsh but it has frustrated me for YEARS, no one seems to care and NOW you do, but then you place me in a bad position where I could lose my insurance with Mumby since if I do not do anything in 5 years I am not only a non-entity I must be inept! I have practiced "architecture" (I SPECIFICALLY tell people I am not technically an architect by the OAA rules and yet many an architect refers work to me that they do not want to do since it is too "below them " (i.e. not enough money in it is the chief reason with their high overhead) sorry for ranting. I would not mind elaborating more on this.

Date:  Apr 14, 2008
User: Amy Huddleston
Age: 29

I think it is up to the individual to decide how serious they are about completing the internship. They have to pay admissions every year so what difference does it make if they are part of the program for 5 years or 15 years?

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

as stated in #4 above, not all companies can provide 3 different types of projects, especially the big projects, i.e. i have been working on the same retail project for the last 2 years, and i may be transferred to a new retail project due to the retail experience that i have gained. this means that i will have to leave the current which provides with valuable experience, and besides there is no guarantee that i would find a new job with the same salary or same experience, and it is not feasible to move to another job just to work on a different type of experience. i think all interns are serioud about getting their license, but the IAP program has been designed for jobs in small practices and it is not easy to fulfill it in big companies.

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: darchitect
Age: 37

There are a number of complex issues: 1) if you are an intern who finished school right after high school, then start working, you have a fixed amount of time to get this done; if you want to take time off to live, see the world, travel or experience a little life, that cuts into that time frame. 2) if you are an intern and decide that you want to have kids, buy a house and a car and begin living a little (let along find your true love, get married and so on...) this all takes time away from the limit. imagaine you are an 18 year old female, just finished high school and accepted into architecture school: you finish your degree at 24 after 6 full time years. you get a job and meet the love your life. after a few years you get married (age 27) and buy your first house together (very norman rockwell here....sorry) and decide to have that first baby. you take a year off on mat.leave, go back to work then realize that you are approaching 29 and the five year limit is coming closer. even if there is a year of grace for being on mat leave, you don't feel ready for the exams as you haven't traveled, seen the world, experienced life or taken time to find out what kind of architect you want to be. then junior wants a sister, it turns out to be twins. you're out for another year away from the work force and all your training. you go back to work, desperate to get the hours and exams done just to meet some arbitrary deadline?

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: Nancy
Age: 28

NO! What a way to discriminate against women in the profession! You want to limit it to five years? Do the math. If a woman takes a 4 year undergrad and 3.5 year master program, as a U of T, she finishes school at roughly 27 or 28. Many women have children in their late 20s or early 30s -- right in the middle of this 5 year internship period. There are already enough issues with women having access to the profession or having to give up their professional lives in order to have kids. Your proposal would exacerbate the problem and is completley unacceptable.

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: TomK
Age: 32

There is already a limit applied to the ARE's. Further deadlines will only alienate others.

Date:  Apr 15, 2008
User: dc arch
Age: 30

If the agenda is to encourage interns to become licensed then this is not it. Would people complete licensure quicker or simply not enroll in the Intern Architect Program? Many people want to gain international experience and this would cause interns who whould have this opportunity to seriously reconsider. The profession as a whole would suffer. Most of those interns return to Canada with invaluable experience. People need to address the real issues of why interns are not becoming licensed and why interns have to leave jobs they love simply because they are missing hours in their intern logbook.

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

I think 5 years is reasonable.

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

For an immigrant architect coming here 10-15 years behind the schedule of a Canadian architect time goes at a different speed and with different challenges. The Reasoning of this Solutions may appear a little restrictive. I believe one may become an architect any time he or she is ready and prepared. Sometimes, a longer time may show more commitment.

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

sometimes it is not within the intern's hand as to how and when they get the expereince which is broken down into so many categories. Setting a time limit for exams is ok to some extent. Also time limit for a foreign trained professional may be difficult as they may not be all fresh from the university to take on task of registering immediately. Soemtimes people are able to get recognized by Cacb, but not able to find a job, then the time limit would not be fair.

Date:  Apr 24, 2008
User: arch_intern78
Age: 29

This is a good idea. Possibly too short time-frame though. But it requires commitment for change from both the intern and the OAA in providing clear instructions on the intern process, and prompt feedback with experience and exams.

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

No time limit - except on the currency of experience (for which there is a limit at present). I am very serious and I have been enrolled in the IAP for 9 years or so. Firstly, within my context there has been no functional reason to pursue this - no dramatic increase in wages, no personal 'credit' or prestige, no limitations to my ability to advance in role and responsibility - and no functional reason within day-to-day work. Unlike other professions - like law or accounting, for example - there is no organizational effort to help move people though the system - and the firms do NOTHING to assist with the major burden - time. I am under a lot of pressure now to complete the ARE - but I am loaded with more and more work. It just doesn't balance. Apart from administrative convenience, I can see no reason to place limitations on the program duration (except as I noted above - for experience).

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

There are several constraint specially when internationally trained professional seeks license in Canada or US some of them are cost of living , Family, cost of courses, Barely trying to make ends meet by working supporting himself,family & working while trying to get crenditial to go back on track of his somewhat lost profession.Individual circumstances varies vastly.

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

This reads as over anxiousness on the part of the OAA to speed up the licencure of interns. Most interns are serious and eager to get to registration, but life is complicated, and with little incentives for registration,they find themselves taking longer than they would like. Adding punishment to what is already less than a motivating process is doubling the difficulties, and will turn many away from registration. At least allow for re-application, as the PEO, after the five year period.

Date:  Apr 28, 2008
User: Jayant
Age: 32

In my opinion, if an intern has X amount of experience in the last Y amount of years, and has written and passed the exams no more than a Z amount of years ago, they should be eligible to receive their license. This insures that the knowledge and experience is up to date and relevant with current practices. After a certain amount of time, it's completely fair for the exams or experience to expire. What the X-Y-Z shuold be, I have no idea.

Date:  May 02, 2008
User: nguyenMSA
Age: 27

Your reasoning, "We are looking for Interns who are serious about joining the profession as full members," is insulting because it insinuates that Interns do not take their profession seriously. Perhaps the reason for the disproportionate ratio of Intern to Architect is the onerous licensing process itself and not the Intern's lack of will.

Date:  May 02, 2008
User: cvriend
Age: 39

Interns have many factors they consider when decided about registration, and having to rush and get registered to avoid a time limit doesn't address any of them. This doesn't seem to address at all a few of the biggest reasons that Interns I know choose not to be registered -- ie. the great increase in annual fees (not to mention the whole new requirement for ongoing education) when the designation is not required for work in an office, the liability complications involved in doing side jobs or freelance work after becoming registered, etc.

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

Just Distribution of wealth for the beginning and respect on level of education and meritt (will never be, I know)

Date:  May 07, 2008
User: joey
Age: 43

This has to be the biggest bone headed idea I've ever heard in my life. Who came up with this? Not even the NCARB 5 years clock is this unfair. Come on guys give your head a shake.

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

I /strongly/ disagree with this additional requirement. As mentioned above, my concerns include: 1) What forms of considerations will be made for those who have extenuating circumstances that prevent them from finishing on time? For example, maternity/paternity leave, opportunities oversees, relocation, being laid-off, returning to university, etc. 2) Will there be an option to apply for a leave of absence without forfeiting existing experience? Interns have already invested six years towards joining this profession before even starting their internship. Delays do not mean the intern is not serious about joining the profession. Perhaps penalties or repetition of requirements is more reasonable than outright banning from reapplication. Or better, increase the incentives to become a full member.

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

I believe this is very unrealistic. There are numerous things that happen to an intern as they start their career. Some may be gung ho before the actual intern phase, but others lose their faith in the grueling first 2 years, still others come back because it is their dream to be an architect and finish. I believe that a dream has no time limit, as well with the ideal way the OAA has set up the required hours for each slot, 5 years can be unrealistic for other interns, as architecture is still a business as stated by the admission course where there is an actual book that's call MBA.. mastering the business of architecture.

Date:  May 20, 2008
User: Lea W
Age: 39

As noted by many others, this has no flexibility for those who are pursuing other life options (such as having children). I agree that more than 1 year experience is important and that the exams should be reformed to be more relevant and less onerous (and expensive).

Date:  May 23, 2008
User: eddyson
Age: 54

Completion time should be the prerogative of the intern. If conditions are conducive interns will on their own hasten the process in order to be fully registered. Who would not like to be a full fledged architect?

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

Time limit will curb procrastination (and weed out those who are not serious), but the process for extending the limit should not be unreasonably onerous.

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

There are hardly any building being done in ON. Those once there are, like someone said, cottage deck foundation in Muskoka. Please not this one.

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

Sounds like you're forcing people to become licenced eventhough they may not want to....a bad move in my eyes.....interns will drop by half if you do this....

Date:  Jun 13, 2008
User: djanssen
Age: 36

5 years is not realistic given the career opportunities available to an architecturally trained individual. These opportunites would have to be passed by as a result.

Date:  Jun 17, 2008
User: tinac
Age: 31

its hard enough already to go from being an intern to a proffessional with not much monetary benifit at the end of the road, why make it worse? enabling interns to get experience and write exams while still in school wold be a better solution. But canadian schools with their unnessesarily long bachelor and master degrees seem to want to churn out academics, not professionals. besides the bachelor courses are a total waste of time, cash grab on the part of the universities.

Date:  Jun 26, 2008
User: jmaw
Age: 24

I agree that that there should be a time limit on the accreditation process, however, individuals should be able to reapply for Intern status. Everyone's life and circumstances are different. Encouraging and enabling people to complete their education are good things. Disabling people to complete their education is a bad thing.

Date:  Jul 02, 2008
User: Don Lee
Age: 45

Basically everyone should have chances to apply to do something as long as the person wants.

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

Interns should be allowed to reapply.

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

I don't think the problem is really with the exam's difficulty or its cost. The real problem is that there is NO incentive to become registered as an architect and there are a few disincentives: - there is an outlay of time and $ to go through the exam - there is no corresponding benefit to most individuals once they obtain their registration: the fees for the OAA are high; here are continuing education req'ts which are relatively expensive, time consuming and not very interesting; it is unlikely that most individuals are going to set up in practice; it is unlikely that in the short to medium term, their income will be affected by their registration; and finally, their is no societal prestige associated with being a "registered" architect. Engineers on the other hand, can at very low cost, join their association early in their career and add this to their business card. I rather think we are tacking this issue backways: our graduate architects are working quite nicely without completing the intern process and we have set the bar so high and the incentives so low that major surgery is needed to change anything significantly.

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

Interns should have UNLIMITED time to complete licensure requirements. The OAA should not be so greedy,as far as money is concerned and always think of pay your dues, your time is up, reapply, etc. The process is as frustrating as it is.

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

I think 5 years is too short. Too many things in life come up. Extend to 7-10 years. I do agree that there has to be some kind of motivating factor in place. I actually don't know what the benefit is for people who continue to be an intern for eons. Why bother signing up then?

Date:  Feb 12, 2009
User: Javier
Age: 39

this very much depends on the length of experience required. And, exams should be folded into the academic requirements and held immediately following graduation from an accredited program.