Meeting of RIAI Architectual Technicians in DIT 19 June 2008

topcatcbr

Hi there was anyone at this meeting. The RIAI sent the details via email to IATGN subcribers. This was an invitation to RIAI Tech members and Prospective members. It was attended by a number of (prospective members) including myself. They were asked about the accession route by people who didnt attend one of the two acreddited courses and especially the time period required by these people.
It was noted that it was the opinion of the board that these other courses are inferior and damaging to the profession. While i accept this is probably true it does do us no favors as a profession to divide the body of graduates. It reduces our effect as a body of professional and provides further reason for our profession to be discreddited.
I would like to be a technician member of the RIAI as it is the only irish represintitave org for Arch Techs but i see the waiting period as being prohibitave.
I understand that the RIAI need to protect their standards and not weeken their position but no account is given to prospective members who have a dip or degree in arch tech over some one who has a certificate in construction studies.
I feel an accession exam for those with an arch tech qualification after two years of professional experience before entry would be more apropriate.
this still leaves the acreddited courses with their level of distinction over the others.
It would also facilitate the progression of professional arch techs.

As it is it is easier to change profesion and gain professional status than progress.

archtech

I thought the RIAI do have a Technician Entry Exam, which they generally hold every second year.

Mellor

topcatcbr wrote: »

It was noted that it was the opinion of the board that these other courses are inferior and damaging to the profession. While i accept this is probably true it does do us no favors as a profession to divide the body of graduates. It reduces our effect as a body of professional and provides further reason for our profession to be discreddited.

I was there last night, good to see a decent turnout.
I have a few observations on you post though, the person who mentioned uncredited courses as be possibly "inferior and damaging to the profession", was not a member of the board. That was his opinion and was not part of the board's offical dialouge.
However, they did say that courses need to be accredited.

I understand that the RIAI need to protect their standards and not weeken their position but no account is given to prospective members who have a dip or degree in arch tech over some one who has a certificate in construction studies.

I understand your point, but the arch tech courses are uncredited, thats the key. So it is wrong to give them an advancement over another course. The facility is there for them to meet (and regain in some cases) the standard if they wish.
Look at this this way, if they did offer an edge, would Construction studies, or buildin studies course change there name to Arch tech, now they would gain the same edge. (while still being uncredited)

Mellor

archtech wrote: »

I thought the RIAI do have a Technician Entry Exam, which they generally hold every second year.

They do, and there is a expierence required,
the op was asking for reduced exp requirement for unaccredited AT courses

topcatcbr

Does the number of architectural tehcnicians working within the industry over the ratio of RIAI tech members not indicate that their is something wrong. As i have already said it weakens us as a profession and gives us less power to evoke change.

sydthebeat

What about technicians who qualified from an accrediated course but work in a practise thats not RIAI.... that my particular situation and as far as i know i would have to sit the entrance exam as well.

sinnerboy

sydthebeat wrote: »

What about technicians who qualified from an accrediated course but work in a practise thats not RIAI.... that my particular situation and as far as i know i would have to sit the entrance exam as well.

Stronger position then vice versa Syd . Answer was a little vague -"talk to RIAI"

topcatcbr

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Should everyone join all, CIAT, RIAI Tech, IBCI, and any other club/organisation that comes along or could we all stand up and push for our own body to best represent us, ATI through the IATGN. I know it has all been debated before but could we maybe hear from a Committee Member on the current position.

It would be helpfull. Its been too long since the last update. however i suspect that the majority of IATGN commitee members are academics they would have been busy over the last couple of months. Maybee things will move on again now the summer break is in swing.

sinnerboy

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Should everyone join all, CIAT, RIAI Tech, IBCI, and any other club/organisation that comes along or could we all stand up and push for our own body to best represent us, ATI through the IATGN. I know it has all been debated before but could we maybe hear from a Committee Member on the current position.

IATGN - appear to break it down to 2 options - RIAI (AT ) or CIAT . Detailed handout from meeting examines pros and cons RIAI vs CIAT

sinnerboy

topcatcbr wrote: »

Does the number of architectural tehcnicians working within the industry over the ratio of RIAI tech members not indicate that their is something wrong. As i have already said it weakens us as a profession and gives us less power to evoke change.

I was struck by a statistic yesterday - of all those who trained as AT's - where are they now ?. Breaks down into 4 equal groupings

1. left industry entirely
2. became architects
3. heads down "just doing it" . part of architects practices and / or AT practices
4. As above + IATGN "active" . Part of debate for change

I have been firmly ( and happily ) in group 3 for many years , but leaning towards 4 now

topcatcbr

sinnerboy wrote: »

I was struck by a statistic yesterday - of all those who trained as AT's - where are they now ?. Breaks down into 4 equal groupings

1. left industry entirely
2. became architects
3. heads down "just doing it" . part of architects practices and / or AT practices
4. As above + IATGN "active" . Part of debate for change

I have been firmly ( and happily ) in group 3 for many years , but leaning towards 4 now

I would be interested to know how many graduates moved into other areas (eg building surveyor, project manager, etc.)due to the limitations imposed by our education ceiling.

Poor Uncle Tom

We have a sparkley new qualified technician in our practice. I had to smile the other day, enthusieasm like that should be bottled. An old cynic like me wonders how long it will last, or will the lustre be slowly ground down like the rest of us.:rolleyes:

TopCat are you suggesting the IATGN committee is made up of Lecturers and Teachers ??? tut tut...

Mellor

I don't think so, alot of the AT members have done well in the org.
And from the talk that the president gave the other night, he is very aware of the value of ATs

archtech

Mellor wrote: »

I don't think so, alot of the AT members have done well in the org.
And from the talk that the president gave the other night, he is very aware of the value of ATs

However would the RIAI be willing to give AT an equal vote or chance to become President ?

Futhermore would it all AT members use the RIAI practice documents if in private practice on their own account.

If the AT was treated equally as a professional when then yes the RIAI may be the way to go.

There definately have been advantages to ATs been in the RIAI in the past (still are some) CPD etc

I think the RIAI would have difficultly themselves(the majority of the ordinary members I mean) in sharing their instutite equally with the ATs.

save energy

RIAI President Mr Sean O'Laoire is very aware of the issue's being raised, but as suggested in his opening speech, there are much bigger issues to address. The Irish Construction Services Sector has built itself up to cater for a population of 15 million, for example in '06 bringing 90,000 units to a market with a natural demand for 35,000 pa while at the same time the UK built 230,000 for a population of 50 million.

quote from yesterdays IT ' Speaking at a construction industry conference in Dublin Castle, Mr Lenihan: “We’ve had a building boom going on in Ireland since the mid-1990s and I have the misfortune to have become the Minister for Finance a few weeks ago as the building boom was coming to a shuddering end."

Its very late in the day to be making demands on the Institute, who have some very difficult years ahead for their existing membership. It must be remembered that any Guild or society has a obligation to protect the commercial interests of core membership. AT's do not yet have significant clout by way of membership to secure their unique interests are at heart of the RIAI's decision making. Supporting AT's many of which are associates and directors of the large commercial practicises is one thing, but supporting the movement to give suitably qualified AT's the same competencies as Architects is quite another. The salient question of the night was asked by DB 'Will the RIAI support its technician membership in private practice." A question that may never get a clear unambiguous answer, it is clear however that the issue can be passed between the Institute and the Architects Registration Boards and remain suspended in the ether between.

Many of my contemporaries are burn't out from 10 -12 years of extreme productivity. Now as the market turns, the benefits which they were led to believe were accruing to them are being deferred due to the slack market . Even with a full suite of Architects skills, team leadership and Project management qualifications, each glass ceiling has another just waiting above. The technical education and experience we should be so proud of, can be a limitation, almost a stigma. Moving to private practice was seen by many as a way escaping this, producing excellent quality work, now being faced with problems in certifying compliance. Up-skilling is difficult as most Post Grad + Masters programmes require Hons degrees and we just can't wait any longer for a simple part time course to bring us up to this. 50% of graduates today in Ireland leave college with a Masters. A Diploma is perceived in some quarters as having similar stock to a City and Guilds.

But lets think this out without regard for past of present tense. Look down the line. Regulation will demand low energy commercial buildings by 2010, passive standard housing by 2011, zero carbon by 2015. Not just that, all buildings will be rated on a 6 star rating, to be incorporated on the BER label, which credits embodied energy and water harvesting for example. That said, the Biggest issue facing architects is going to be compliance.

The 2007 Part L demands that compliance is based on building performance, this requires supervision and acceptance of builders accredited details, air tightness testing to check requirements of air permiability and thermal imaging to verify insulation. Compliance certs are currently full of caviates to defer liability from architects, Opinion on substantial compliance will no longer be sufficient. We've been here before, with fire certs, a simple method was devised to be used by architects as part of the design process, in most part this service got farmed out to specialists with specific Liability Indemnity (Fire Consultants) and so it will be with Energy and Ecology Regulation. With Higher fuel bills clients will demand specifics on performance of buildings, such as return on investment and carbon savings. The best skill set to fill this niche is the Architectural Technician. The building services engineers or environmental engineers as they now like to be called ,can throw some very fancy equipment at a problem, but can they integrate the technology holistically into the construction concept. Their is a role emerging in parallel to the designer for a specialist who will guide the client and architect to produce a lean green comfortable habitat from briefing to performance testing without compromising design aesthetics, buildability, cost, longevity and quality.

Technician, Technologist, constructor, whatever the debate is? I'd like to muddy the water by introducing another title to the debate 'Ecotect'. This term used to define a new breed of Architects and Technologists designing with a view to the future was coined by Paul Leech http://constructireland.ie/Articles/Design-Approaches/Redefining-Building-Boundaries.html
Some of the Brightest individuals at the vanguard of sustainable consultancy and research have come from an AT background. A disproportionate number of us are trained as Energy Assessors and Air testers. There is an argument for saying; why should our organization (whatever eventual form it takes), pursue the sole route of achieving equality of opportunity with Architects. There is growing demand out there for a service which incorporates design/energy/performance which we are in best position to exploit (with the help of a course, any course to get us up to LEVEL 8). There's a huge appetite for empirical research and data from built low energy projects, issues such as what happens with moisture transfer when you superinsulate, How do you achieve decrement delay( a type of thermal mass) with lightweight building methods. There is a huge amount of research ongoing re the built environment in DIT such as the work of Dr Kirk Shanks, and Pat Daly. looking at the final year energy projects it seems the young pups graduating this year have experience of Daylight simulation, Dynamic thermal modelling, thermal bridging analysis, air permiability design, Carbon negative assessment. We need a fourth year now, any ol fourth year. Its dosent have to be done right, it just needs to be done.

The time to act on this is now before the opportunity is lost. Does anybody else agree that the Architectural technicians should get organised to provide such services as a new discipline, which we are begining to see the construction sector and Architectural profession are in dire need for.

sinnerboy

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

To Sinnerboy:R U suggesting we join RIAI Tech en-mass, .

yes

sinnerboy

save energy wrote: »

RIAI President Mr Sean O'Laoire is very aware of the issue's being raised, but as suggested in his opening speech, there are much bigger issues to address. The Irish Construction Services Sector has built itself up to cater for a population of 15 million, for example in '06 bringing 90,000 units to a market with a natural demand for 35,000 pa while at the same time the UK built 230,000 for a population of 50 million.

quote from yesterdays IT ' Speaking at a construction industry conference in Dublin Castle, Mr Lenihan: “We’ve had a building boom going on in Ireland since the mid-1990s and I have the misfortune to have become the Minister for Finance a few weeks ago as the building boom was coming to a shuddering end."

Change always seems difficult , it's time rarely appears opportune .

Its very late in the day to be making demands on the Institute, who have some very difficult years ahead for their existing membership. It must be remembered that any Guild or society has a obligation to protect the commercial interests of core membership. AT's do not yet have significant clout by way of membership to secure their unique interests are at heart of the RIAI's decision making. Supporting AT's many of which are associates and directors of the large commercial practicises is one thing, but supporting the movement to give suitably qualified AT's the same competencies as Architects is quite another. The salient question of the night was asked by DB 'Will the RIAI support its technician membership in private practice." A question that may never get a clear unambiguous answer, it is clear however that the issue can be passed between the Institute and the Architects Registration Boards and remain suspended in the ether between.

Its not late - this "day" has no end . Evolution and change is ever expanding . If we swell the ranks of the membership , as we have the Architects workplace , we gain influence . Most of us work in the same workplace with Architects . Logic dictates we are represented by the same institute . In time "the answer" will come

Many of my contemporaries are burn't out from 10 -12 years of extreme productivity.

Speak for yourself - and i have a few years on you

Now as the market turns, the benefits which they were led to believe were accruing to them are being deferred due to the slack market . Even with a full suite of Architects skills, team leadership and Project management qualifications, each glass ceiling has another just waiting above. The technical education and experience we should be so proud of, can be a limitation, almost a stigma. Moving to private practice was seen by many as a way escaping this, producing excellent quality work, now being faced with problems in certifying compliance. Up-skilling is difficult as most Post Grad + Masters programmes require Hons degrees and we just can't wait any longer for a simple part time course to bring us up to this. 50% of graduates today in Ireland leave college with a Masters. A Diploma is perceived in some quarters as having similar stock to a City and Guilds.

Disagree with boldened comments above

Technician, Technologist, constructor, whatever the debate is? I'd like to muddy the water by introducing another title to the debate 'Ecotect'.

thanks

We need a fourth year now, any ol fourth year. Its dosent have to be done right, it just needs to be done.

Want to re phrase that ?

Poor Uncle Tom

Yeah, Peter may need a cert for the gates..

RKQ

save energy wrote: »

The time to act on this is now before the opportunity is lost. Does anybody else agree that the Architectural technicians should get organised to provide such services as a new discipline, which we are begining to see the construction sector and Architectural profession are in dire need for.

Interesting post with points that are well worth considering. As things get more technical and eco friendly, it would seem an appropiate step.

save energy

Sinnerboy,

Thanks for your comments.

I agree joining the RIAI en-masse is the correct direction to take, but in parallel with this there is a plan C. lets call it the Carlsberg option.

Many Architectural Technicians have the ability and drive to excel in Architects Practices or as sole traders, I wasn't one of those. There are many who wouldn't want a management position but would like a recognizable specialization apart from documentation and detailing. The issues for AT's arn't solely to do with the ability to compete with Architects and producing compliance certification.
The Diploma in Architectural Technology, a level 7 qualification compares unfavorably with Architects Part 2 hons degree + Part 3 post graduate practice diploma. There are limited options to go from level 7 to 8. In many cases AT graduates have to go back to first or second year undergraduate Architecture or Planning. This is why those with AT diploma's need a part time or full time course to bring them up to Hons degree level which will allow them take advantage of the huge choice of post graduate courses that gave been developed recently.

As was stated at the meeting, that the level 7 would not be sufficient qualification to register as a Commercial (non-domestic)Energy Assessor. The answer to this for those who want to up-skill is to bring the diploma up to degree and then do a Masters. This isn't needed for everyone but there is a few out there who no doubt want this?

Cormac Allen stated that the level 8 add on was a few years away as it had to be done to an accredited standard. Unfortunately this means another 2 years, with the way the market is going with offices shedding staff daily, new regs being transposed every other week and the construction market gone to pot, 2 years is an eternity away. My point is that we need some sort of bridge between level 7 and 8 to be prepared for the low carbon future.

Supertech

I was at the meeting in DIT on Thursday. The one thing that struck me was the comment about the IT's not providing accredited courses. What we should be doing is lobbying them not only to provide these courses but to have them accredited by the relevant bodies - CIAT - RIAI - IATGN - ATI (if it ever happens). This is the crux of the problem for us. We have no professional accreditation ... I don't believe many still doubt our skills, it's our professionalism that various entities seem to question. At least these issues have brought this situation to a head. topcatcbr - you nailed it in your post - most of us were happy to tundle along until now - that's not going to be good enough anymore. We should all be pushing the limits as regards our profession. Professional accreditation needs to become as important to us as it no doubt will to this year's crop of 'graduate architects' ... oh wait, they can't use that title ... watch those people push to get their part 3's.

Mellor

I've started anew thread on the topic of representation and extracted relevant posts from the RIAI meeting thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055319866