Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: AICP eligibility requirements and proposed changes; what do you think?

  1. #1
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,753

    AICP eligibility requirements and proposed changes; what do you think?

    The latest from AICP....quoted here, for discussion by all, since it's on a membership only page:

    From AICP President Daniel Lauber

    AICP Membership Requirements

    At 25 years of age, AICP is now a mature, secure organization that needs to look carefully at its threshold requirements to apply for membership. It seems only fair that I should explain the whys and wherefores of why these recommendations have been made.

    AICP has come a long way since its creation 25 years ago. Back then experience requirements to take the AICP exam were set very low to facilitate rapid growth in the number of AICP members. Those minimal experience requirements, coupled with 25 years of promoting the AICP credential have worked — aided by a shift in the general culture to use credentials as shorthand for determining professional competency rather than examining an individual's actual work. More than half of APA's professional planner members have earned their AICP credential.

    During those 25 years, we've often heard the question, "What does AICP membership really mean?" It certainly means that we agree to adhere to the AICP Code of Professional Conduct. And it certainly means that we commit ourselves under that Code to keep current on planning practices through whatever means of continuing education or professional development works best for each of us. And without a doubt, it means we demonstrated on a test that we possess at least a minimum knowledge of planning practices, principles, theory, and history — a core body of knowledge, if you will — that should equip us to perform our jobs competently.

    But in every professional organization's development there comes a time to step back and reevaluate its threshold membership requirements.

    Last January, I asked the AICP Membership Committee to look at increasing the length of time planners must practice before they can take the AICP Exam. I've always felt a bit uneasy about allowing a planner with only two years professional experience to become an AICP member. (For the record, I took the exam for the first and only time after seven years of professional practice.) Few planners have really matured professionally in just two years on the job.

    The current eligibility requirements to take the AICP exam are:

    Two years professional planning experience for APA members with a graduate degree in planning from an accredited program
    Three years professional planning experience for APA members with a bachelor's degree in planning from an accredited program
    Four years professional planning experience for APA members with any other graduate or undergraduate college degree
    Eight years professional planning experience for APA members with no college degree
    I'll be perfectly candid. The experience requirements for AICP seem inexcusably low. As little as two years of professional experience really seems insufficient time to be awarded the AICP credential — if the credential is to really mean much of anything. The low threshold level leads to planners taking the AICP exam who still have more "book learning" in their heads than the practical, on-the-job education that really reflects the credibility and capability of a professional planner. These low eligibility requirements lead to planners taking the AICP long before they have matured in the profession.

    I fear that this low threshold approach to new members actually diminishes the value of the AICP credential. I strongly suspect that the AICP credential will garner more respect from members of related professions and the general public if:

    The AICP designation means that AICP members actually practice the sound, ethical, inclusionary, and discrimination-free planning APA/AICP have long advocated — an effort that your current AICP Commission in cooperation with the APA Board continues to advance, but one that will take many, many years to fully implement.

    APA/AICP proactively promotes professional planning through savvy advertising and public relations where APA/AICP isn't afraid to take positions on controversial issues and isn't afraid to mix it up with those who attack planning. In other words we display some guts and spunk — an approach that I think APA will fully pursue, but one that rests beyond AICP's delegated scope.

    AICP requires more professional experience before you can become an AICP member — something within AICP's scope and that AICP can act on by itself.
    While researching my Government Job Finder and other Job Finder books, I've found that most credentialing organizations require more professional experience than AICP before someone can apply for membership. I suspect that the length of experience required should be based largely on how long it takes a professional to develop the on-the-job skills needed to be considered worthy of a professional credential like AICP — and for the credential to signify something besides you're good at test-taking. I concluded that just two to four years is probably not an adequate amount of time.

    We live in an era where the public and many government officials are ready to simply accept a credential like AICP or PE without carefully looking at an individual's actual professional accomplishments. So far most in the planning profession has avoided accepting this mythology (or "foma" as Kurt Vonnegut would call it). But accepting the reality of how the world works today, can we really continue to allow so little professional experience of our newest AICP members?

    So last January I asked the AICP Membership Committee to explore these possibilities of requiring more professional planning experience before an APA member can take the AICP Exam, and to identify the financial consequences to AICP of any new experience requirements it recommended.

    The committee looked carefully at the age and experience cohorts within the APA professional planner membership. It presented a carefully reasoned report that took into account financial consequences of various alternatives and recommended shorter threshold periods than I had initially proffered. Given the constraints under which AICP operates, I understand the committee's rationale and fully support its recommendations to increase the practice requirements by just one or two years, depending on type of planning education. The shortest recommended length of professional practice to be eligible to take the AICP Exam — for graduates of accredited master's programs in planning — would be increased to three years, the same requirement for taking the New Jersey exam for a planner license.

    Now we need your input before we finalize the draft bylaw amendment.

    Click here to read the proposed bylaws changes.

    Two separate AICP Committees have examined this question and approved moving these changes along. But we need to hear from you now — before the Bylaws Committee proposes specific amendments to the AICP Bylaws to implement these changes (and once it does, all APA members get another opportunity to comment before the Commission votes). We realize that just as in the real world, an abstract discussion of this question would generate little input, but that a more concrete proposal would stimulate APA members to share their views more readily.

    Whatever changes the Commission decides to make — if any — after receiving your input, could not go into effect before 2006.

    The entire Commission wants to hear your views on whether or not we should increase the number of years of professional experience as outlined in the first article on this page and if the proposed minimum years of practice are reasonable.

    The entire Commission looks forward to hearing from you soon. We would really appreciate if you could put your comments in writing so your exact thoughts can be shared, unedited, with the entire Commission. Please e-mail our staff at AICP (AICP@planning.org) or write to the AICP Commissioners at: AICP, 1776 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20036.

    In addition, please do not hesitate to share your thoughts on our discussion forum so we can have an open, give-and-take discussion: http://apa.forumflash.com.

    We look forward to hearing from you prior to leaving on October 19 for the AICP Commission's fall meeting in Portland, Oregon. Thanks so much for your time and thoughtfulness.

    Sincerely,

    Daniel Lauber
    AICP President
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  2. #2
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    5,593
    I'm one of those unfortunate sons that graduated from a program that is not accredited by the PAB, at least it is not on their list. Yet for some reason, it seems like a large number of planning directors in this state have some kind of degree from our program, considering its size. That really makes me wonder whether the PAB accreditation is as relevent as APA/AICP would like to believe.

    I think we can all agree that Bachelors, Masters, PhD, etc. only get you so far in this extremely practical field. Experience is what really makes for good planners, IMHO. Keep in mind that I am only four months out of my undergrad when I say this and am four years away from meeting the current requirements for AICP. You would have to have an amazing job fall in your lap to really have the experience for some kind of certification in less than 2 years; I don't care where you went to school.

    I think maybe we need to look at other types of certification for inspiration, such as AIA and RLA. I agree that local governments often look at those magic initials after an applicant's name without looking at the actual accomplishments.

    Why stop with the experience requirements? From what I've heard from friends, the AICP exam is a pretty worthless measure of the quality of a planner. Let's revamp the whole system while we're at it! Make being AICP something really special!

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  3. #3
    Cyburbian Planderella's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 1998
    Location
    NOLA
    Posts
    4,468
    APA/AICP proactively promotes professional planning through savvy advertising and public relations where APA/AICP isn't afraid to take positions on controversial issues and isn't afraid to mix it up with those who attack planning. In other words we display some guts and spunk — an approach that I think APA will fully pursue, but one that rests beyond AICP's delegated scope.
    Savy advertising and public relations - Inundate your members with PAS advertisements of overpriced books that you will most likely never read.

    Take positions - On what??? Did I miss a PAS booklet somewhere?

    Guts and spunk - It takes a lot of that to charge their members exorbitant dues and conference registration fees.
    "A witty woman is a treasure, a witty beauty is a power!"

  4. #4
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,074

    My 2 Centavos:

    1. Damn few of us chose our school based upon the PAB. (say it with me…WHO?) We choose a school based upon our incomes, how well we look in the school’s colors, where our daddies met our mommas, the nearest beach, the place we live, or the place we want to practice. So all this requirement does is pump up the PAB. Maybe it should count for private schools, but if a state university offers a planning degree they are telling everyone that it is good enough to work in that state. So, having a PAB blessed degree might count for taking six weeks off of the requirement or shaving 5% off of the fee to apply to pay a fee. But otherwise…big whoop.

    2. Make the minimum time in field 4 years with any masters degree and 6 with a bachelors and 8 with a HS diploma, and 10 years with a degree from DeVry. Require 10 hours a year of ongoing – affordable- professional education and make it available to all, not just those in the big cities. Make it ALL available on-line.

    3. Provide more services to the members. I get to put more ink on my resume as a result of paying my AICP dues and damn little else. It seems all the benefits of being AICP are at the buffets eaten by FAICP members. Need More Trickle Down.

    4. Change the test to make it more real world and even add some current events in planning to the test.

    5. Add an interview component to the AICP. There are some folks that take tests well that I would never want to man the counter or lead a small group because they are too green. AICP shouldn’t be an old boys club and this requirement could make it just that, so I offer this one with some reluctance.

    6. Require 10 or so hours of service to the profession annually to come with the AICP lapel pin.

    7. Grant AICP members large estates in our colonies and a suitable amount of provisions to allow them to subdue the current occupants and establish God’s kingdom in the infidel heathen lands.

    8. Provide AICP members discounts on travel, lodging and rental cars through the use of their AICP Gold Club Visa points.

    9. Encourage diversity by understanding that we are not one vast group of people that are all lockstep in the same political mindset and that we encourage diversity in our members by not going out of our way to piss of the conservatives.

    10. Blue Collar Comedy Tour tickets for all AICP members at the next APAcon.

  5. #5
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,753
    Quote Originally posted by el Guapo
    2......Require 10 hours a year of ongoing – affordable- professional education and make it available to all, not just those in the big cities. Make it ALL available on-line.

    3. Provide more services to the members. I get to put more ink on my resume as a result of paying my AICP dues and damn little else. It seems all the benefits of being AICP are at the buffets eaten by FAICP members. Need More Trickle Down.

    4. Change the test to make it more real world and even add some current events in planning to the test.
    Mandatory, affordable, available continuing ed is my biggest gripe about AICP currently. There's no real motivation for current members to do it. I do it (and have the CPDP certificate to prove it) out of my desire to remain a well rounded professional....but I know of too many AICP'ers who simply are content to have their employer pay their dues and do nothing to further one's professional development....yet "look" like a better qualified candidate for job openings.

    Services and benefits of membership are lacking tremendously also....I echo EG's thoughts on this as well....and something has to be done to the exam to make it something other than "the big test of planning trivia" (to borrow Cardinal's great name for it.)

    7. Grant AICP members large estates in our colonies and a suitable amount of provisions to allow them to subdue the current occupants and establish God’s kingdom in the infidel heathen lands.
    LMAO.....great idea!

    9. Encourage diversity by understanding that we are not one vast group of people that are all lockstep in the same political mindset and that we encourage diversity in our members by not going out of our way to piss of the conservatives.
    Amen to this one as well!
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  6. #6
    Cyburbian donk's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    skating on thin ice
    Posts
    6,959
    I'll wade in a little here, even though I am not AICP, but could be if I had the $$, my CIP membership is almost completely transferable.

    I for one did choose my school because it was accreditted by the Canadian Institute of Planners (CIP). Seemed to me that if you want to work in a profession the program you attend having been recognized by the professional body is a valid seal of approval. Note, the program is no longer accredited.

    On the masters vs under grad differentiation in time to membership, that is hogwash. 4 years of course vs 2, hmmm??? I know that a masters is more intensive study and study at a specific level but get real. I have friend's who have both an undergrad and graduate degree in planning and say that most of the people they studied their masters with were no brighter or better planner than anyone they met and studied with in undergrad. BTW I "only" have a BA in planning.

    On the length of time, up here they validate log books to assess your time and expereinces. A person doing only park land dedication review for 2 straight years, would not be permitted to do the interview. You have to have various expereinces at various tasks and scales. You only need 2 years, but it ussually takes 2-3 to get enough projects under your belt to qualify for the next step.
    Too lazy to beat myself up for being to lazy to beat myself up for being too lazy to... well you get the point....

  7. #7
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In a new discovered reality where it doesn't snow
    Posts
    13,827
    Wow…

    I would be able to sit for it in 2006 if they do not change anything… but if they do, I will have to wait another year. (I decided that I want to get it so I will be as marketable for future jobs)

    That poses another question of does an AICP make a person more marketable for higher up creative jobs?

  8. #8

    Registered
    May 1997
    Location
    Williston, VT
    Posts
    1,371
    I like EG's list.

    Increasing the experience requirement is sensible, and adding an interview would be a complicated, but highly desirable requirement.

    However desirable it might be, continiung ed can't be mandatory until it can be delivered at a price affordable to all members.

  9. #9
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog entries
    3
    I don't have much to add to what everybody has posted here. As usual, El Guapo posted some very good ideas, with his usual touch of subtle humor.

    The "APA=liberal agenda" or APA - condemnation of Bush environmental policies /= inherently liberal" arguments are good fodder for a new thread. I'd like to know what parts of the "conservative agenda" conflict with good planning practice, and the whether dedicated Republicans/conservatives in the profession find themselves at odds with their values.

    Is anybody going to direct this to the APA/AICP? They do NOT visit Cyburbia, much less have representatives that participate in the Forums -- we know Cyburbia is a non-entity to the higher-ups in Chicago -- so someone has to tell them; otherwise, we're just preaching to the choir.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  10. #10
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,753
    Quote Originally posted by Dan
    Is anybody going to direct this to the APA/AICP? They do NOT visit Cyburbia, much less have representatives that participate in the Forums -- we know Cyburbia is a non-entity to the higher-ups in Chicago-- so someone has to tell them; otherwise, we're just preaching to the choir.
    I had planned on taking the ideas here and posting them on their forum.
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  11. #11
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog entries
    3
    Off-topic:
    Quote Originally posted by NHPlanner
    I had planned on taking the ideas here and posting them on their forum.
    They have a forum? Where?

    EDIT: I see the link now. D'oh!
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  12. #12
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,753
    Quote Originally posted by Dan
    Off-topic:


    They have a forum? Where?
    Off-topic:
    From Dan Lauber's article:

    In addition, please do not hesitate to share your thoughts on our discussion forum so we can have an open, give-and-take discussion: http://apa.forumflash.com.
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  13. #13
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,074
    I get an SQL error everytime I go there. Perhaps if I threw more in the AICP kitty they would let me in to the site?

  14. #14
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,753
    Quote Originally posted by el Guapo
    I get an SQL error everytime I go there. Perhaps if I threw more in the AICP kitty they would let me in to the site?
    I was able to see it yesterday....but am getting an SQL error today as well. I'll e-mail comments to Lauber if I have to.
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  15. #15
    Cyburbian Planderella's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 1998
    Location
    NOLA
    Posts
    4,468
    Slightly OT

    A few months ago, AICP solicited comments from the members on the proposed changes to the Code of Ethics. I emailed the Ethics Code Committee asking that if the changes were adopted before the November AICP exam, would they be covered on the exam. I never received a response from them. I have heard that the exams are usually made months, maybe a year, in advance, but you never know what's going on when it comes to AICP.
    "A witty woman is a treasure, a witty beauty is a power!"

  16. #16
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,753
    FYI

    The APA forum is back up, and some one has posted a link to this thread.
    "Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

  17. #17
    Cyburbian el Guapo's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Samsara
    Posts
    5,074
    Quote Originally posted by NHPlanner
    FYI

    The APA forum is back up, and some one has posted a link to this thread.
    Oh Crap, there goes my FAICP and maybe even my AICP :-0

  18. #18
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    632
    The low threshold level leads to planners taking the AICP exam who still have more "book learning" in their heads than the practical, on-the-job education that really reflects the credibility and capability of a professional planner.

    Seem to me like this is part of the problem. When I took the exam a few years ago it was all about "book learning" and not about the everyday, real world stuff that most of us deal with on a daily basis. Bottom line for me is that APA needs to get out of their ivory tower and realize that there are a whole bunch of us who do not work in huge planning departments for big cities. I agree with everything else already stated.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  19. #19
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog entries
    3
    Off-topic:
    The APA/AICP bulletin board seems to be up now, but it's sloooooooow. (Edit: it's down now. Given the limited time it's been online, it seems very unreliable, but then again, someone would have said that about Cyburbia a couple of weeks ago when the server crashed.) (Edit: It's back up again.)

    Their bulletin board is on a specialized forum hosting service, using a beta of Invision Power Board 2.0 as the forum software. (Cyburbia uses vBulletin 3.0.3, of course.) IPB is free, but you have to pay for maintenance; it's a decent forum package.

    Is the APA forum intended to be permanent, or is it just to discuss AICP eligibility requirements? I wonder why they just couldn't have started a thread here, and then referred people to that. I forgot ... we don't exist in the mindset of the APA.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  20. #20
    Cyburbian Plus PlannerGirl's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Va
    Posts
    4,604
    Dan we have already long ago established the fact that the APA and AICP suck. I wont spend my hard earned dollars there.
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

    Remember this motto to live by: "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, martini in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO- HOO what a ride!'"

  21. #21
    This whole notion of changing the eligibility proves that the test is a joke. When he says “I've always felt a bit uneasy about allowing a planner with only two years professional experience to become an AICP member” he is basically saying that the test is irrelevant, Using his logic and over exaggerated sense of the AICP exam’s importance someone with only two years experience should never pass the exam.

    He goes on to say “Few planners have really matured professionally in just two years on the job.” Who is he to determine if someone has matured professionally? I know that after two years I had matured professionally and I passed the AICP exam on the 1st try.

    He claims that “Ithe AICP credential will garner more respect from members of related professions and the general public if…” Does he really think that architects or engineers give a crap if a planner they are working with has an AICP or not? Does he think that they will suddenly treat planners as equals if the AICP eligibility standards are more restrictive? Will planners be paid like architects and engineers with more strict eligibility requirements? Does the general public even know what AICP means? Will the public drop their opposition to a new low-income housing project being promoted by a planner because the planner has a “hard-to-obtain” AICP designation and must know what they are doing? I think the answer to these questions is undoubtedly “no.”
    "I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are."

    - Homer Simpson

  22. #22
    Cyburbian The One's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where Valley Fever Lives
    Posts
    7,656
    Blog entries
    1

    Arrggghhh!!!!

    Quote Originally posted by donk
    I'll wade in a little here, even though I am not AICP, but could be if I had the $$, my CIP membership is almost completely transferable.

    I for one did choose my school because it was accreditted by the Canadian Institute of Planners (CIP). Seemed to me that if you want to work in a profession the program you attend having been recognized by the professional body is a valid seal of approval. Note, the program is no longer accredited.
    You just hit a nerve DONK A few years back, I was looking to obtain the CIP for myself in anticipation of working in Canada. Well, after numerous discussions with APA/AICP about reciprocity and the severe lack of it......it couldn't be done nearly as conveniently as if I were from Canada Neither AICP or APA was any help at all and simply didn't care about the issue. This was the first major time I needed help from AICP and APA and got ZERO So, I hope all you Canadians, Australians, Briton's and all the rest enjoy the one way street of immigration rules and work visa's that we yankees dole out yearly in a most self deprecating manor, without the least bit of reciprocal consideration Outside of a lousy $40 fee waiver or something similar....what a joke.....

    Example: Australians listing Urban Planning as a needed specialty for those wishing to emigré, then creating a point system that doesn't allow entry without a cool 1/4 million in cash to invest...

    Now that my blood pressure is too high........I'm OUT

    Just my silly rant, has nothing to do with you DONK
    "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    John Kenneth Galbraith

  23. #23
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,685
    Blog entries
    3
    Quote Originally posted by Repo Man
    He claims that “Ithe AICP credential will garner more respect from members of related professions and the general public if…” Does he really think that architects or engineers give a crap if a planner they are working with has an AICP or not?
    No. Consider the number of architecture and engineering firms that include "Planning" in the firm name, even though they might not employ a single planner. Contractors who can design a house aren't called "architects." Why can architects also call themselves "planners" without the education or certification?
    Does he think that they will suddenly treat planners as equals if the AICP eligibility standards are more restrictive? Will planners be paid like architects and engineers with more strict eligibility requirements?
    Doubtful. The APA has not not lobbied for salary reform. Also consider that, at least in the United States, there are more planners than jobs; it;s supply and demand at work.
    Does the general public even know what AICP means? Will the public drop their opposition to a new low-income housing project being promoted by a planner because the planner has a “hard-to-obtain” AICP designation and must know what they are doing?
    I don't think most of the public knows what AIA or PE mean, but a good portion do. IMHO, only planners know what AICP means.

    Quote Originally posted by The One
    So, I hope all you Canadians, Australians, Briton's and all the rest enjoy the one way street of immigration rules and work visa's that we yankees dole out yearly in a most self deprecating manor, without the least bit of reciprocal consideration Outside of a lousy $40 fee waiver or something similar....what a joke.....
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe members of Commonwealth nations have reciporical membership agreements with the RTPI. However, the APA/AICP doesn't. Thus, an RTPI planner could become AICP by taking advantage of two reciprocal acreements (RTPI -> CIP, CIP -> APA/AICP), but AICP certification would get you laughed out of an RTPI section meeting. All because we don't put the Queen on our coins. (If Bush gets re-elected, reciprocity may become more of an issue among APA/AICP members. )

    Another thought: what's with FAICP certification? It's good to recognize the uber-planners that have given their hearts and souls to the profession, but I don't think there is an equivalent in other professions. Could FAICP designation dilute or confuse the meaning and intent of AICP?

    I think we might also have to look at other professions, and their certification techniques and customs. After all, in the US you can't practice law unless you pass a state bar exam, even if you have a J.D. I'm not sure of the deal with accountants and state CPA certification; I've known practicing accountants who aren't CPAs. However, you can be a planner without AICP certification.

    What makes planning different is that compared to most other professions, is that it's so "fuzzy". While property law, copyright law and criminal law are related -- they're all rooted in English common law -- development review, comp planning, economic development, community development and transportation planning are wildly different animals. While specialties in other professions are different in the way that cat breeds are different, planning specialties differ like dog breeds. There's not that much difference between a Maine Coon Cat or Persian, but there's a huge difference between a Chihuahua and a Great Dane; they're both dogs, though. Just look at the difficulty we have trying to describe what we do for a living in fewer than 50 words! I would imagine that the AICP test has to cover a much broader range of knowledge than a bar exam, which certainly makes the task of certification even more difficult.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  24. #24
    Cyburbian Plus JNA's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    De Noc
    Posts
    19,318
    Quote Originally posted by Dan
    Another thought: what's with FAICP certification? It's good to recognize the uber-planners that have given their hearts and souls to the profession, but I don't think there is an equivalent in other professions.
    ASLA does.
    The designation "Fellow" acknowledges extraordinary work. Fellows are nominated in one of four categories - 1. works of landscape architecture, 2. administrative work, 3. knowledge, and 4. service to the profession.

    more about it at: http://www.asla.org/Members/FASLA.htm
    Oddball
    Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves?
    Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here?
    Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
    From Kelly's Heroes (1970)


    Are you sure you're not hurt ?
    No. Just some parts wake up faster than others.
    Broke parts take a little longer, though.
    From Electric Horseman (1979)

  25. #25
    Cyburbian The One's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where Valley Fever Lives
    Posts
    7,656
    Blog entries
    1

    Yes, and.....

    Quote Originally posted by Dan
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe members of Commonwealth nations have reciporical membership agreements with the RTPI. However, the APA/AICP doesn't. Thus, an RTPI planner could become AICP by taking advantage of two reciprocal acreements (RTPI -> CIP, CIP -> APA/AICP), but AICP certification would get you laughed out of an RTPI section meeting. All because we don't put the Queen on our coins. (If Bush gets re-elected, reciprocity may become more of an issue among APA/AICP members. )
    I suspect we are the red headed step child of the developed world when it comes to planning prestige....Begin Rant: Our APA/AICP people have failed us miserably by focusing on Red Chinese Planning instead of Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan and Korea......I can't tell you how many invites I've gotten over the last 10 years to participate in RED Chinese Planning functions for a minimal fee ($5,000 to $7,000).. How about an exchange program between all of these countries, subsidized by APA/AICP!!! Salary differences could be matched to make things fair.... 1year program at least!! What is this, am I in "crazy world" don't others have the ability to come up with interesting and new ways to use our dues (mine were nearing $500 this year!). Rant concluded.....
    "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
    John Kenneth Galbraith

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. AICP professional experience requirements?
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 8
    Last post: 02 Dec 2008, 12:44 PM
  2. Using internships for AICP eligibility
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 8
    Last post: 22 Mar 2007, 2:17 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last post: 09 Feb 2007, 3:11 PM
  4. Housing rehab program eligibility requirements
    Economic and Community Development
    Replies: 5
    Last post: 20 Dec 2005, 1:22 PM
  5. Main Street Center: eligibility requirements
    Economic and Community Development
    Replies: 8
    Last post: 28 Mar 2005, 10:40 PM