Urban planning community | #theplannerlife

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 32 of 32

Thread: Thoughts on the proposed new AICP candidate pilot program

  1. #26
    Member
    Registered
    May 2013
    Location
    Mid Atlantic
    Posts
    21
    I guess maybe capstone was the wrong word. I just consider it to be an achievement that should open doors to me if I was to move and/or seek another job and that reflects a decent amount of experience within the field. My current position as a Planner II allows me to promote into a Senior Planner without having to reapply for an open position. I think one of the stepping stones to that promotion will be the AICP certification.

  2. #27
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    60
    I took the survey and made it clear that I am not in favor of reducing the work experience requirement. I've had several interns who come out of Planning programs and are clueless about actually implementing policy decisions on a local level. If I have a choice of hiring someone straight out of a Planning program or someone with a non-Planning degree and several years of actual experience, I'll take the latter. Maybe I'm just biased, since my degree program was Environmental Science and I worked my way through the ranks, but I don't think a Planning degree alone prepares someone for the multi-faceted work that takes place in a smaller or mid-sized local Planning Department. In my opinion, reducing the work experience requirement lowers the standard for AICP, which is the exact opposite of what should be happening.

  3. #28
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    1,710
    Quote Originally posted by flbeachgirl View post
    I took the survey and made it clear that I am not in favor of reducing the work experience requirement. I've had several interns who come out of Planning programs and are clueless about actually implementing policy decisions on a local level. If I have a choice of hiring someone straight out of a Planning program or someone with a non-Planning degree and several years of actual experience, I'll take the latter. Maybe I'm just biased, since my degree program was Environmental Science and I worked my way through the ranks, but I don't think a Planning degree alone prepares someone for the multi-faceted work that takes place in a smaller or mid-sized local Planning Department. In my opinion, reducing the work experience requirement lowers the standard for AICP, which is the exact opposite of what should be happening.
    I could not agree more. It seems like every proposal these folks dream up actually cheapens the credential instead of enhancing it. Remember when they wanted to give professors an automatic pass to AICP? That probably got the membership stirred up more than anything else I can ever remember. What a shit show that was.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  4. #29
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    1,710
    So I got my email today officially asking me to be a mentor for a "candidate". And of course the program will have the effect that many of us in this thread said over a year ago. I'd love to see the actual responses to the survey that was done. I can't believe there was widespread agreement to essentially cheapen AICP yet even further. Reducing the work requirement is complete and utter bullshit. I guess I will be sending yet another email to APA. Not that it ever helps. Man, what a crock.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  5. #30
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    1,545
    To clarify, it does look like they can just take the test early. Once they pass the test, they would be considered "AICP Candidates." They wouldn't be able to use the AICP credential until they met the professional planning experience requirements. I think I'm okay with that. It doesn't really give them much of an advantage over someone who comes in from an allied field since they won't be able to qualify until they meet the experience requirements, but also allows them to take the test while the information is still fresh. Although, I still think there are a lot of questions/scenarios on the test related to management that would be challenging for someone fresh out of school to think through.

    https://www.planning.org/aicp/candidate/#details

  6. #31
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    1,710
    Ah. Well that makes me feel a little better. I'm just automatically suspicious when something like this happens ever since the fiasco with the proposal to grant tenured professors AICP status.
    He's a planner, he's a dreamer, he's a sordid little schemer,
    Seems to think that money grows on trees . . .

  7. #32
    Cyburbian imaplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2004
    Location
    Snarkville
    Posts
    6,662
    Quote Originally posted by MD Planner View post
    So I got my email today officially asking me to be a mentor for a "candidate". And of course the program will have the effect that many of us in this thread said over a year ago. I'd love to see the actual responses to the survey that was done. I can't believe there was widespread agreement to essentially cheapen AICP yet even further. Reducing the work requirement is complete and utter bullshit. I guess I will be sending yet another email to APA. Not that it ever helps. Man, what a crock.
    I remember when they sent out the survey asking people whether they supported requiring CM to maintain AICP. Almost every single person I asked about it had filled out the survey saying no. They did it anyways and I doubt they had popular support among certified planners.

    I also sent a couple emails to APA saying that, as a rural planner my options for CM would be extremely limited. I got canned responses and I have to say that without exception all replies to my emails to APA over the years have either misspelled my name, "Planning" or something else suspicious, leading me strongly to believe they are using a PR firm in India or some other country.
    Children in the back seat can cause accidents - and vice versa.

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 3
    Last post: 18 Mar 2008, 6:25 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last post: 29 Nov 2007, 12:18 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last post: 15 Mar 2006, 6:13 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last post: 16 Nov 2005, 10:43 AM
  5. Replies: 36
    Last post: 19 Nov 2004, 11:45 AM