Of course some of you have seen my posts here about getting a job in planning. I have shown my frustration at times and maybe in the wrong direction. At my age, you get more desperate and volunteering isn't really an option although I have time but no patience because I want to make some cash.
In any event since I am still not working in the field, I've decided to rethink some of the qualifications I have to be a "planner" as opposed to some one who knows more about policy.
Here's my dilemma. When I went to school for the 2nd time, I bypassed all the courses such as introductory studio which dealt more with land use plans, site planning and all the "technical" side of planning. The only course I took was a basic theory course on community planning (at another school) and then got further understanding of the basic terminology through planning law. I never took CAD, never drafted a site/subdivision plan and dabbled in GIS. I have been told that you learn on the job. But when applying to some entry-level planner positions, some suggest planner I is the first step, others say junior planner/planning assistant is the 1st step towards a planning career. I guess it depends on what city/town/region, agency or firm you apply to. I have applied to these positions but somewhat reluctantly not because I don't want to do it but feel I am wasting my time but because I won't know everything. Furthermore because they always list X years of experience which of course as the old adage says " how can you get experience if they're not willing to give it to you."
Then there's policy. Of course I have a degree in public admin and took some course through my second degree based on policy analysis and evaluation. There's one school of thought that in order to do policy, you have to learn the technical side of planning so you can fully understand the policy behind it. The other side is that since I have all this policy schooling behind me, then just apply for policy-related positions. Of course the only policy I know is related to transportation, housing, and immigration.
Then it was suggested to me from a fellow alumni to look at economic development. It's true have taken some business courses, worked in investments (administration only) and understand regional policy yet I have never taken an "economic development" course. But looking some of the job descriptions for an EC officer and some of the courses to get your EC. D designation, it's all about research, marketing, understanding business needs, which is pretty easy I find.
After sending out my resume just to get "A JOB" for now, and now reading that's not a real good idea through these resume books I have downloaded, I am caught in this rethinking dilemma.
This ain't no Dear Abby but sounds like it huh?
So to all you Cyburbians, what's your take on this? I know it's Friday the weather's nice, at least in Toronto it is, and some of you will be playing. So let me hear your thoughts! Thanks!