Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 47 of 47

Thread: Article: Professors to get a pass on AICP

  1. #26
    Cyburbian TOFB's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Loma Linda's
    Posts
    1,410
    Does this cheapen AICP? I sure think so. What is the motivation other than offering a reward?

  2. #27
    Cyburbian Plus
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    De Noc
    Posts
    17,617
    Do you know your state chapter's position on this ?
    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)

  3. #28
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,920
    Add me to those who read that the decision was made long before they asked for input. As every comment on the topic that I have seen is against the proposal, I'll wait to see if the AICP board acts otherwise - but I will not expect it.

    I had the thought that there should be a demand to have the board share the written comments - sort of a "public information request". I wonder how they would respond to the request, and then to their actions in the face of overwhelming opposition.
    Anyone want to adopt a dog?

  4. #29
    OH....IO Hink's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Hang on Sloopy...land
    Posts
    9,634
    APA Ohio is opposing the measure, and I would assume many other state organizations will do the same. It seems like a very small percentage of people really want this. I would guess 80-20 if it went up for a vote.
    A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

  5. #30
    Cyburbian ecofem's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    203
    Here's Breinich's direct e-mail......................

    abreinich@myfairpoint.n*t

  6. #31
    Cyburbian tsc's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under the Table
    Posts
    1,900
    Blog entries
    6
    this is the response that many some have submitted....feel free to copy!

    "I fully support the comments and positions of Stuart Meck and Rebecca Retzlaff as summarized below:

    The message the Commission is sending with this idiotic proposal is that while you can spend thousands of dollars to earn a planning degree (often going into considerable debt) and take a test after a certain period of experience, the people who teach you really never have to prove what they know in an objective test. Nor, more critically, would these faculty members have to show, for example, that they could understand and apply the AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct or that they knew the basics of American planning law, topics that the examination tests for and the AICP certification maintenance program requires special attention to.
    What a fraud and insult this proposal represents to the hard-working planners who have dutifully followed the rules, gotten their education and experience, and have taken and passed the certification examination (and for the planning faculty who did likewise)! "
    "Yeehaw!" is not a foreign policy

    Renovating the '62 Metzendorf
    http://metzendorf.blogspot.com/

  7. #32
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    516
    Did AICP even send members an email asking for our opinion? I don't recall receiving one. I was only informed of this yesterday when I received an email from my chapter president. I'm sure they think having more professors AICP credentialed gives us more legitimacy but doing it this way does just the opposite.

    On second thought, I will support this IF AICP finds an accredited university willing to bestow a Ph.D. on the rest of us.

    Since we just got this on the MD APA listserv the only folks responding are academics telling us what a wonderful idea it is. One is even proposing that being published in a peer-reviewed planing journal be awarded 10 -15 CM credits per article!!!!!

    I'm about to hit "send" on my reply all email that says "Or, you could just take the exam like everyone else."
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  8. #33
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,527
    Blog entries
    3
    Quote Originally posted by MD Planner View post
    I'm sure they think having more professors AICP credentialed gives us more legitimacy but doing it this way does just the opposite..
    From the AICP email:

    The eight AICP Commissioners are professional planners, elected from among AICP membership, trying to address a long-standing, difficult challenge of reaching out effectively to planning educators without undermining the value of the AICP credential.
    If professors and others in academia really wanted AICP certification, they would have spent their time and money to take the tests. A reason why AICP credentials are uncommon among those in academia is probably because they don't need them. Their PhD and tenure establishes their legitimacy among their peers and those outside of academic. AICP credentials is more important for planners, where they serve to put them on a more level playing field with credentialed professionals in other fields.

    Will this set a precedent for future exceptions? Will lawyers become exempt from taking the exam because the bar is seen as an equivalent?

    Quote Originally posted by MD Planner View post
    Since we just got this on the MD APA listserv the only folks responding are academics telling us what a wonderful idea it is. One is even proposing that being published in a peer-reviewed planing journal be awarded 10 -15 CM credits per article!!!!!
    Yikes!

    The APA Upstate NY list has been silent.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  9. #34
    Cyburbian btrage's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    Metro Detroit
    Posts
    6,419
    Just another reason to cement why I will not seek AICP. I've been hired into 2 director level positions without it. It's a joke, and most likely only matters in the private sector. But even then, experience ultimately trumps those GD initials.
    "I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany"

  10. #35
    Cyburbian Veloise's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan (Detroit ex-pat since 2004)
    Posts
    4,749
    Quote Originally posted by Tarf View post
    ...In my undergraduate program, the planning portion of the program was horrible and was led by a professor who had no real world experience as a planner. This individual consistently made the claim that "planning is not political." LMAO. Yeah, he deserved AICP for his wisdom alone.
    ...
    Similar experience: my undergrad had seven profs, only one of which had recently worked in the field. They'd stand up and recite their hoary lectures from memory. My first actual learning took place in an urban utilities class (taught by a TA).

    Masters classes: a couple of practitioners, and a lot of "advice" that just didn't work. One prof offered an exercise: two neighbors have a dispute, bring it to the city, how do you solve it. The answer he sought was "have them talk to each other."

    Many years back I thought that a route back into planning would be to obtain AICP, but the bar to exam admission is set very high, and clearly would not be obtainable without cooperation from former supervisors who'd left the profession (if not the working world or the planet). Thanks to teh interwebs, I found out that the credential is not held in as high regard as the certifying body would like to believe.

  11. #36
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,527
    Blog entries
    3
    Quote Originally posted by MD Planner View post
    Did AICP even send members an email asking for our opinion? I don't recall receiving one. I was only informed of this yesterday when I received an email from my chapter president.
    I think that's how most people found out about it; online or through a third pasty at the last minute.

    For all the complaints about CM, AICP gave us far more advance notice of the chances. Maybe they didn't want to deal with that level of fallout again, so they decided to be far more discreet about the professor pass proposal.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  12. #37
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    516
    Just got an email from our chapter president who was in contact with national. Comments have been received (almost overwhelmingly negative). AICP will be considering comments and put forth a final draft of some kind of proposal and then we will have the opportunity to comment again. Let's all be diligent and make sure when it is released we let everyone know ASAP so we can weigh in again.

    I'm still waiting for a good answer of where this idea came from. It was funny on the Maryland listserv, at first there were a few professors extolling the virtues of the proposal . . . . and then the tsunami hit. Suddenly the academic world got very quiet on the issue.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  13. #38
    Cyburbian mike gurnee's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 1998
    Location
    Greensburg, Kansas
    Posts
    2,944
    In the first few years of AICP a person could get the initials with a state chapter nomination. Presumed to be honorary, it was similar to the current proposal. We did it once when I was on a chapter board and I hated it. I took the test, why should someone not? It was a unanimous vote by that board but no one was pleased. One and maybe two board members worked under this person. Some time later AICP dropped that "easy way in".

  14. #39
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,527
    Blog entries
    3
    Quote Originally posted by MD Planner View post
    Let's all be diligent and make sure when it is released we let everyone know ASAP so we can weigh in again.
    Post it here right away, so we can pit the news on the front page. Anyone interested in writing an editorial on the topic?
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  15. #40
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    5,247
    Quote Originally posted by Dan View post
    Post it here right away, so we can pit the news on the front page. Anyone interested in writing an editorial on the topic?
    I'm willing to contribute to an editorial, but would like a co-writer if at all possible.

    "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)

  16. #41
    Forums Administrator & Gallery Moderator NHPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 1996
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    7,568
    AICP members can get an update on where the issue stands at http://www.planning.org/leadership/f...n/2011/dec.htm

    Short summary: A Task Force has been set up to review the proposal and the feedback from the membership.

    The task force will review all comments received to date. Additional comments intended to inform the task force's deliberations and discussions should be sent to getinvolved@planning.org.

    Timeline: early February 2012, the task force will develop initial recommendations, taking into consideration the early feedback from membership. The AICP Commission will then request comments from members for the Task Force's use in developing a full list of recommendations.

    Full recommendations from the task force by March 2012, then further review and comment by membership.

    After that, the recommendation will be revised and a proposal be offered for review by the membership, Chapter Presidents Council, Divisions Council, and Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, then consideration by the AICP Commission during the National Planning Conference meetings in April 2012.
    "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. #42
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,920
    My contribution:

    I want to reiterate my opposition to automatically granting the AICP designation to tenured faculty. AICP is intended to recognize the professional standards and accomplishment of practicing planners. Tenure is granted to those who teach and research. There is a distinction. Other professions – law, medicine, and engineering among them – do not grant professional credentials upon faculty for the mere fact that they have been granted tenure. Why should we belittle our own credentials by doing so.

    Furthermore, there are countless questions raised by a program of granting AICP to faculty. Will this only be to faculty with a planning doctorate teaching in a recognized planning program? What about a faculty member with an economics or geography degree? What about someone with a planning doctorate teaching in a geography program? Face it, many faculty without planning doctorates and teaching in other fields perform research and offer instruction more relevant to the planning profession than what some planning faculty contribute. The bottom line is that if they want to earn the AICP designation, there is a process for doing so. Everybody should have to follow the same route.

    This idea is being considered, it has been said, to encourage greater interaction between the academic community and professional planners. There are better ways to promote this goal than to cheapen the work many people have done to attain the AICP credential and raise its professional stature among both planners and the public at large.
    Anyone want to adopt a dog?

  18. #43
    Cyburbian ofos's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Slightly Off-Center
    Posts
    8,258
    Quote Originally posted by Cardinal View post
    This idea is being considered, it has been said, to encourage greater interaction between the academic community and professional planners. There are better ways to promote this goal than to cheapen the work many people have done to attain the AICP credential and raise its professional stature among both planners and the public at large.
    I think we can conclusively say that the proposal has been successful in promoting interaction between the two communities. I'm not sure it has been the type of interaction that the Commission anticipated. One measure of leadership is the ability to recognize that a mistake has been made and then to rectify it, even if it means reversing a decision and taking responsibility for the mistake. We'll just have to wait and see what type of leadership the AICP Commission will demonstrate.
    “Death comes when memories of the past exceed the vision for the future.”

  19. #44
    Member
    Registered
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    16

    Interaction isn't my goal

    Quote Originally posted by ofos View post
    I think we can conclusively say that the proposal has been successful in promoting interaction between the two communities. I'm not sure it has been the type of interaction that the Commission anticipated. One measure of leadership is the ability to recognize that a mistake has been made and then to rectify it, even if it means reversing a decision and taking responsibility for the mistake. We'll just have to wait and see what type of leadership the AICP Commission will demonstrate.
    Planning academics have no interest in interacting with practicing planners. The feeling, on my part, is mutual.
    After numerous communications, including mine, the AICP commission has pushed this to the LA conference where the FAICP's that thought this up in the first place will be 'interacting' on it. It's a done deal folks. They will humor our 'citizen input', but we practicing AICP's were long ago kicked to the curb. If any of us did this on a plan or development, APA would roast us alive. Hypocrisy.

  20. #45
    Member
    Registered
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    16

    Planning faculty bestowed AICP

    http://www.planning.org/aicp/faculty/


    Moderator note:
    *Hink* Threads merged.
    Last edited by Hink; 07 May 2012 at 3:29 PM.

  21. #46
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally posted by NHPlanner View post
    AICP members can get an update on where the issue stands at http://www.planning.org/leadership/f...n/2011/dec.htm

    Short summary: A Task Force has been set up to review the proposal and the feedback from the membership.

    The task force will review all comments received to date. Additional comments intended to inform the task force's deliberations and discussions should be sent to getinvolved@planning.org.

    Timeline: early February 2012, the task force will develop initial recommendations, taking into consideration the early feedback from membership. The AICP Commission will then request comments from members for the Task Force's use in developing a full list of recommendations.

    Full recommendations from the task force by March 2012, then further review and comment by membership.

    After that, the recommendation will be revised and a proposal be offered for review by the membership, Chapter Presidents Council, Divisions Council, and Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, then consideration by the AICP Commission during the National Planning Conference meetings in April 2012.
    So, now that this is offical, does anyone have any recollection of seeing anything from APA on the issue in early February? Yeah, me neither. I don't know why it bothers me so much, but this just really burns my ass.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  22. #47
    Cyburbian hilldweller's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Land of Confusion
    Posts
    3,736

    Quote Originally posted by MD Planner View post
    So, now that this is offical, does anyone have any recollection of seeing anything from APA on the issue in early February? Yeah, me neither. I don't know why it bothers me so much, but this just really burns my ass.
    This is B-O-G-U-S.

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

More at Cyburbia

  1. NYU Schack professors?
    Student Commons
    Replies: 2
    Last post: 10 Aug 2009, 12:47 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last post: 26 Nov 2008, 6:36 AM
  3. Rate Your Professors
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 10
    Last post: 21 Oct 2003, 1:05 PM
  4. Replies: 34
    Last post: 08 Jan 2003, 7:34 PM