Our elders in the profession could have chosen any number of ways to determine the requirements for professional architecture education. Imagine, for example, if a governing body of tenured professors made all decisions on the content and structure of architectural education. Presumably they would be the most knowledgeable about the current system, the best able to assess educational content, and the most credible advisors for other educators. And they would surely seek input from others when appropriate.

Instead, education policy and requirements in our profession are determined through an exhaustive and inclusive process that relies on direct representation from diverse stakeholders: educators, students, practitioners, regulatory board members, and even members of the public. This process is pursued at great expense and labor, but for the ultimate benefit of the educational experience and thus of the profession as a whole.

The policies and requirements of internship in the profession are not determined through any such collaborative process. This is not a comment on hard-working and idealistic individuals who do determine the requirements of internship, but rather a simple observation that the existing internship process does not involve stakeholders the way the educational process has for the past sixty+ years.

The Intern Development Program Coordinating Committee (IDPCC) and the Collateral Internship Management Group (CIMG) are the two best examples of how diverse stakeholders might begin to be involved. Both are genuinely collaborative committees charged at some level with "monitoring" or "managing" internship. Both committees include representation from interns, although neither committee has any real funding of its own. Both committees are also, however, currently just advisory committees--two of literally dozens that report to their respective organizations at Board meetings packed with equally pressing agenda items.

Purely by coincidence, both of these committees also met this past weekend to discuss many of the same issues, albeit separately and in different states. We are encouraged that each committee appears to have made some very specific recommendations at these recent meetings. Each committee has asked, however, that their recommendations not be shared publicly until sometime after their representatives have had an opportunity to report back to their respective organizations--late this January at the earliest. Stay tuned.

contents:

1. Interview with NCARB President
2. Collateral Internship Management Group (CIMG)
3. Intern Development Program Coordinating Committee (IDPCC)
4. Meeting Agendas
5. IDP Governance
6. Clarity
7. 2002 Internship Summit Ideas

1. Interview with NCARB President

"[NCARB is] looking for ways to improve the Intern Development Program (IDP). It has worked very well over the years, but it is time to tweak and upgrade the program to match the current profession. We are eagerly watching California's efforts to establish a competency-based IDP and expect to move forward with some form of competency vs. seat-time-based program in the future."
--2002-03 NCARB President Bob Campbell, quoted in the most recent issue of the California Architects' Board newsletter

2. Collateral Internship Management Group (CIMG)

Mission:
"To assure that all aspects of the [Collateral Internship Task Force] report continue to be addressed and implemented."
--quoted from the CIMG's February 2002 meeting report

Members:
The CIMG is composed of one representative each from the ACSA, AIA, AIAS, NAAB and NCARB (chair). Additionally, one representative of the Committee of Canadian Architectural Councils (CCAC) and one intern representative serve on the committee, as well as staff members from all five collateral organizations.

The intern representative is Doug Whiteaker, Assoc. AIA, who can be reached at dwhiteaker@hmcgroup.com.

3. Intern Development Program Coordinating Committee (IDPCC)

Mission:
"Monitors IDP through input from program participants."
--quoted from the 2002-03 IDP Guidelines

Members:
The IDPCC is comprised of three AIA representatives (including one co-chair), three NCARB representatives (including one co-chair), two intern representatives (representing the AIA National Associates Committee and interns-at-large), and one representative each from the ACSA, AIAS, Society of Design Administration (SDA), and the Council of Architectural Component Executives (CACE). The committee also includes staff members from the AIA and NCARB.

At their meeting in March of this year, the IDPCC added an at-large intern representative to the previous AIA National Associates Committee representative. Adrianne Steichen, (dphillips@ordizmelby.comasteichen@loving-campos.com) and Jason Pettigrew (jpettigrew@slaterpaull.com) are the two intern and Associate representatives respectively.

4. Meeting Agendas

Last weekend, the IDPCC convened for nine hours in Fort Worth, TX. Agenda items included a clarification of member roles and responsibilities, organizational reports, a discussion of awards related to IDP, California's comprehensive intern development program, as well as a report on the CIMG. The committee discussed the 2002 Internship Summit as new business.

Meanwhile, the CIMG convened for thirteen hours in Washington, DC. The agenda was primarily dedicated to organizational reports, with time scheduled to develop a final committee report and to discuss the 2002 Internship Summit.

5. IDP Governance

In 1995, something called the AIA Task Force on Education and Internship Standards for Licensure submitted a final report to the AIA Board of Directors advocating for changes to IDP Governance, which was approved by the AIA Board unanimously in 1996. The entire 42-page report can be downloaded from the Internship Summit website at http://www.internshipsummit.org/downloads/1995AIATFonEducationInternship.pdf. A single excerpt follows:

"The IDP Coordinating Committee…serves only as an advisory board to NCARB, which establishes the policies and procedures for IDP. The task force recommends that the IDP Coordinating Committee become the standard-setting body for the IDP program, following the NAAB governance model in which the participating organizations jointly establish policies and procedures."

Additionally, a previous issue of ArchVoices, available at http://www.archvoices.org/issue.cfm?n=138, discusses IDP Governance (and the task force above) at length. In that issue, our confusion was partly over wording in the IDP Guidelines that NCARB has laudably corrected in the most recent 2002-03 edition. Under "IDP Organization," the wording has appropriately been changed from "The program's policies are established by the IDP Coordinating Committee…" to read, "The program is monitored by the IDP Coordinating Committee…." A small change to be sure. But now that we know who doesn't set policy for IDP, we need to figure out who does.

6. Clarity

One of the "contemporary intern needs" identified at the 2002 National Internship Summit was the need for clarity about the registration process. Interns at the Summit made the following comments relative to this goal:

"The internship process and expected outcomes need to be clarified for both the intern and the firm."

"The commitment of academia to inform and produce individuals capable of pursuing licensure needs to be clarified."

"The profession as a whole should be actively engaged in understanding the role of the intern, the mentor, and the process of education-internship-licensure."

"Interns need access to resources in order to make informed and intelligent career decisions."

"Internship should be integrated into a seamless continuum of professional growth and development."

"Individual interns and firm leadership need to discuss their own visions for professional development."

"Architecture firms need to make specific commitments to the intern's professional development and live up to those commitments."

"Internship should be more about professional development, and less about regulation. Focus on qualitative issues (competency), not quantitative (seat-time)."

"Interns and the profession need to validate the formal internship process."

"The profession should take itself seriously. Less finger-pointing among the collateral organizations and more collaborative action to support internship."

7. 2002 Internship Summit Ideas

The 2002 Internship Summit attendees only voted formally on three broad issues. However, the goal was not to achieve consensus on everything, but to unite people who care about internship, generate ideas, and to disseminate those ideas to the most appropriate groups for consideration. The three most specific IDP-related ideas were forwarded to the IDP Coordinating Committee last week, and they follow below:

1. To develop an optional one- or half-day seminar course for those professionals who wish to serve as IDP Supervisors or Mentors. Such a course need not be required, but would provide evidence that an individual was knowledgeable about and committed to the IDP process. Such courses could award Continuing Education credit.

2. While it is currently possible to get some basic IDP credit in a variety of settings, it was also mentioned that there is no way of knowing whether you will in fact get credit until after you have started or even finished the work, often investing significant time before a final decision is returned (e.g., work with a city government, non-profit housing provider, allied professionals, community design center, construction management firm, etc). It was suggested that there be some way of either certifying a few alternative programs ahead of time, or developing other means of ensuring that appropriate credit will be awarded.

3. In alternative training settings (Settings II and III) where work is not always done under the direct supervision of an architect, it was suggested that IDP Mentors (licensed architects) could certify the work done in place of the IDP Supervisor. As a result, the number of credits available for IDP credit in alternative practice settings could be expanded, and credit awarded in training categories A and B for acceptable work done in alternative settings.