Conflicting Viewpoints About The Arki Board Exam
Conflicting Viewpoint # 1: You [need, do not need] those 3,840 hours of apprenticeship to have the optimal background knowledge and experience to take the board exam.
At least, that’s what the High Tribunal of the Arki Board Examiners hoped when they instituted that policy. Fact is, if you were to base from the results of the recent years, there is no correlation between the number of apprenticeship hours and the one’s chances of passing. I know of some people who took the board exam less than three months after they’ve graduated, and passed on their first take. Some even became topnotchers. On the other hand, I know of some who have even completed, and even exceeded the required 3,840 hours, and passed it—on their second take.
Conflicting Viewpoint # 2: You [need, do not need] to study for at least two months to have a chance to pass the board exam.
When a friend of mine took the Board Exam, he only studied seriously for about 3 weeks, and did his studying at night since he is still busy with his sidelines. I know other friends of mine who not only studied in lesser time, but who even found time to go surfing somewhere up north in the 2 months prior to the exam. And all of them passed in our first take.
On the other hand, I know of some people who filed a leave of absence 6 months prior to the exam, studied at day, attended review classes at night, and even took refresher courses. And he/she flunked.
Conflicting Viewpoint # 3: Enrolling in a review center [will, will not] increase your chances of passing.
That’s what all the arki review centers would like to make you think, because that’s their business. So they post these banners outside their office, proudly claiming that this board passer and/or topnotcher came from their hallowed halls, if only to convince potential reviewers to enrol in their centers.
Fact is, no one has ever conducted a study whether these review centers actually has some direct contribution to the success of board examiner. I know of some board passers, even topnotchers, who did not attend review center classes, even the two-week refresher courses. And I also know of some who flunked the board exam more than once, who enrolled in more than one review center.
But that’s not to say that review centers are a waste of time. As I stated above, I was careful to mention that review centers have no direct contribution, because somehow, they have some indirect contribution. These indirect contributions would be in the form of forcing you to be in the mood for studying. Just by attending the night classes from 6-9pm will somehow tell your brain and your body that "you are taking the board exam, you must study now, no more night-outs, no more gimmicks". But then, if you really want to study, irregardless if you went to night-outs or some gimmicks, you really will find the time to study.
Conflicting Viewpoint # 4: Memorization [is, is not] a sure-fire way to pass the first two days of examination.
When the High Tribunal of the Arki Board Examiners consistently ask out-of-this-practice questions like “What do you call this machinery part of the escalator?”, “Who designed this Apartment Building in India?”, and “What do you call this type of transformer connection?”, you don’t really need memorization skills. You need psychic skills, so you can read the minds of Board Examiners as to what will the questions be like.
The way they ask questions in the Board Exam, you have to have a really, really, really broad knowledge about everything that is even remotely connected with architecture. In fact, many board takers have commented that the Arki Board Exam is more like “Who Wants To Be A Millionnaire?” contest, because the High Tribunal of the Arki Board Examiners can simply ask ANY questions they please with no limitations to scope whatsoever.
When I took the Board Exam, a fellow board examiner read from cover to cover the Building Code, the Plumbing Code, and the National Structural Code. She even made little notes in index cards for the important points and dimensions. Come exam time, the predominant questions were mostly about history and professional practice. Taking cue from what happened, another friend of mine who was going take the subsequent board exam decided to focus on history. Come exam time, the predominant questions were mostly about laws.
I even know of board topnotchers who relied on their powers of the “eeny-meenie-miney-mo” to answer the multiple choice questions, rather than going over books after books, codes after codes, sample exams after sample exams.
Conflicting Viewpoint # 5: To pass the board exam, you [need, do not need] to follow all these tips and advices that every board passer seems keen to be giving.
By now, you’ll realize that this Board Exam for Architecture is a complete enigma.
Whether you have the experience or not, you can still pass—or flunk.
Whether you study or not, you can still pass—or flunk.
Whether you enrol in a review center or not, you can still pass—or flunk.
Whether you memorize or not, you can still pass—or flunk.
Given these, then what kind of advice could someone give that could make sense and help future board takers?
No wonder our industry is in such a pitiable state because the main “screening” for would-be architectural professionals is in itself in a pitiable state.
posted by kons @ 6:37 PM
8 comments
8 Comments:
What if we just assume that the board exam is a mere formality to practice architecture? We can't really stop people from practicing architecture on their own. Everyone has a right to shelter. Informal settlers cannot even afford land, much less an architect, so they build their own houses. Economic housing rarely involves the direct participation of an architect. Instead of complaining about the growing number of architects and non-architects in the profession due to the ineptitude of the PRC, we must face the fact that to practice architecture, you don't need to be a licensed architect. So what can we do about that?
i propose we elevate the topic to a higher, or broader level. most of the readers of these articles are from u.p. arki, but do we share the same concerns with other architects, graduates and students from other schools? why not try to tap other schools, see what their comments are, so that we can pinpoint some more the problems, be it the prc, the educational system, or the profession itself. The recent article about the open letter is a good one, maybe we can find other materials like those and then let's see what happens if all these concerns really reach the prc, the boa, or the arki schools. so let's try it, from theory, to practice.
i studied for the board exam in less than 3 weeks. i passed. i'm now a duly-certified, licensed architect...but i still do not claim that i can "build" a house...you're right, it's just a formality thing.
"....what kind of advice could someone give that could make sense and help future board takers?"
Well for starters I wouldn't write an article that would scare them from taking the board exam especially just a few days before they are to take it... hehehe.
Here's my advice: Prepare for the board exam in the manner that you are most comfortable with. If it's studying for a long time, short time, while naked, while flying a kite, in a review school, in a toilet stall or whatever just do it as long as you feel good about it.
Feeling good about the way you studied will give you a sense of confidence and consequently a feeling of preparedness that will help you in facing both the expected and unexpected. Being well rested and having a clear mind during the exams helps a lot too.
And always remember to breathe. People have the tendency to hold their breaths from time to time when in stress. You'll need that oxygen going to your brain so remember to breathe. Take a deep breath everytime you feel pressure. Keeping your mind clear and alert will help you a lot in times of pressure.
Good luck.
Ordinarily, I’d agree with anyone who says that the board exam is a mere formality. At least, how it is practiced here in the Philippines. But in principle, and for the sake of the industry, I cannot settle easy with that assumption, because that that is a dangerous assumption. Dangerous, because it assumes that anyone who wishes to “build buildings”, with or without the competence to do so, can become, on paper, be an architect. If people’s lives and society’s heritage isn’t at stake here, I’m okay with that. But people’s lives and society’s heritage ARE at stake. And so, I must disagree that we can simply assume that you don’t have to be have a license to practice architecture. And that we should make it our responsibility, one way or the other, to see to it that the Board Exam becomes an effective screening for competent professional architects. Allowing for such an action to continue would have detrimental effects to the industry, as we’re experiencing right now. And if left unchecked, these effects would continue and maybe even intensify in the future.
Also: I think we should make a distinction between practicing “architecture” as it generally defined as the “building of buildings”, and practicing “architecture” as a PROFESSIONAL OCCUPATION. When someone adds a new room over a garage, that can be considered to be practicing architecture. But when someone signs, ON PAPER, that he is this architect of that new room, that is PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE. By signing on paper that you are the architect of that building, you shoulder all the responsibility that is attached to it. And we all know the responsibilities are quite heavy, so again I will reiterate, we should not let such actions to continue.
So what can we do about it? At this point of time, I honestly do not know. My knowledge about the industry is limited and my experience inadequate. But just as Nap has suggested, we can start with writing open letters, something like, “Dear BOA, the Board Exams that you conduct are actually not Board Exams but Trivia Exams and are quite getting to be a bore. Can you make it more like really Board Exams in the future? Thanks. Sincerely yours, a Bored architect.”
A lot of bloggers here have been asking: what can we do about the different problems happening in the industry?
Actually, there are other gazillion things that we can do. For me, what’s more important before taking any action is for us—whoever “us” may be—to become united and have one voice. Because if we do take action but we can’t present a united front out there, because there are some factions who disagree with some of the points that were raised, or that some individuals have some personality problems with those who are taking charge, then all those actions will be put to naught. If one analyzes closely the make-up of Filipino society, ours is a very personality-driven society. Issues are lost in an exchange of personal attacks. Just read through history books. Just read the newspapers. Just read through the previous blog entries here even. You’ll see what I mean.
And so, I will stress again, before we initiate any action, we have to be sure that we will back those who will lead 100%, no holding back. We have to have unison and resolution on the matters that we are trying to raise. So that’s why I think we should still try to pursue these discussions further. So that we can thresh out the conflicting points of view, and see where we can agree on something, and build upon it.
And Nap said it good when he said that we should hold these discussions on a broader level. I think one of these days, maybe we guys can meet in person and discuss over a cup of Starbucks coffee exactly how to do so. Initiating some concerted actions would entail some kind of organization. So it would be better if we already have an idea on how to deal with it before the issue arises. After all, that’s what the school told us planning is for, right? So lets it put it to good use, i.e. from theory to practice. (This is getting to be a cliché.)
But that’s just me. All of you surely would have some opinion on the matter. So speak now or forever hold your silence.
Good points. I'd really like to see more people do some positive action instead of just shooting their mouths off.
Only thing is, someone who would want to lead has to EARN his support. He can't just demand to be backed up 100%.
do we really need this??? if we have our own way of making more money kahit graduate ka lang???? oh well .. bahala na si batman..
CIONI
Post a Comment
<< Home