Tenured Faculty Membership Program
Under the terms of the Tenured Faculty Membership Program, AICP will invite currently tenured faculty in planning programs accredited by the Planning Accreditation Board to apply to join if they are not already AICP members. In the future, faculty who are granted tenure at PAB-accredited programs will be invited to apply for AICP membership. As with individuals who pass the Comprehensive Planning Examination, their membership in AICP will take effect when they pay APA, chapter, and AICP dues in full.
Responding to changes in the planning academy
AICP developed the Tenured Faculty Membership Program in response to extensive changes in U.S. planning programs. Thirty-five years ago, academic planning departments were "recognized" by the American Institute of Planners. Today, planning programs are accredited by the Planning Accreditation Board, a body established by APA and its professional institute, AICP, in concert with the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning. Increasingly, the PAB considers outcomes such as pass rates on the AICP exam when it evaluates a program.
In the early 1970s, many planning faculty were recruited directly from the field of practice and arrived on campus with an AIP credential awarded after an oral interview that served as the threshold exam. Few had doctorates. In 2011, doctoral degrees are common among individuals who join planning faculties at accredited university programs. Research and publication are expected and are key criteria for the grant of tenure. Achieving tenure typically requires an extensive, written application that must be approved at several academic levels such as department, school, and university.
The AICP Commission invites feedback
The AICP Commission would like to hear from members before finalizing the program. Please read the questions and answers below and use the "Contact Us" section that follows to submit additional comments or questions about the Tenured Faculty Membership Program, no later than December 1, 2011.
Q: Who is eligible for the Tenured Faculty Membership Program?
A: Faculty of planning programs accredited by the Planning Accreditation Board are eligible. Any faculty member in a PAB-accredited planning program may apply once he or she is granted tenure. Faculty members of non PAB-accredited programs are not eligible at this time.
Q: Is passing the Comprehensive Planning Examination required?
A: No. A university's grant of tenure requires an extensive written application that must be approved through a rigorous process that includes votes of approval at several stages. This will be considered as an alternative that is a written examination.
Q: Do these members have to pay AICP dues?
A: Yes. Like all AICP members, they must pay APA, chapter, and AICP dues.
Q: Do these members have to fulfill Certification Maintenance requirements?
A: Yes. Like all AICP members, they must fulfill CM requirements: 32 CM credits every two years, 1.5 of which meet the law requirement and 1.5 of which meet the ethics requirement.
Q: Is the reinstatement process any different for these members?
A: No. Like all AICP members, they must comply with AICP's reinstatement policy. If an individual's membership lapses for more than four years, he or she must follow the application procedures for new AICP membership, which includes passing the Comprehensive Planning Exam.
Anna Breinich said:Tenured Faculty Membership Program Proposal
Over the past week, I have personally heard from over a hundred AICP members interested in the proposal before the Commission to create a membership program for tenured faculty at PAB-accredited planning programs. That's in addition to those members that read the online materials posted on November 11 and submitted comments through the website. I must say that my fellow Commissioners and I appreciate the dialog.
The Commission is considering a proposal to invite tenured faculty of PAB-accredited programs to apply for AICP membership. If qualified, the member would then be accepted without taking the exam. The grant of tenure, which requires extensive written materials and, typically, three or more levels of approval, is being considered as an acceptable alternative to the written Comprehensive Planning Exam. National and chapter leaders discussed the proposal on several occasions at APA's 2011 fall leadership meetings held in September in Washington, D.C. The proposal was also discussed with the American Collegiate Schools of Planning at their annual meetings in October. The Commission then decided to post the proposal for AICP member comment which was done through the November 11, 2011 edition of APA Interact for Certified Planners.
In developing the draft Tenured Faculty Membership Program proposal, the Commission struggled with many of the concerns raised by members. 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. We feel this is one way to strengthen our profession and connectivity to those educating future planners.
We do look forward to a continued, more respectful and substantive dialogue with members on this issue and your thoughtful suggestions for improvement. I strongly encourage you to read the detailed information available online about the proposal, along with the form for submitting comments. After reviewing comments, we will offer an additional comment period on a more finalized draft.
Anna Breinich, AICP
President of AICP
Email to APA members. Reading between the lines, the message I get is "We received a lot of email expressing opposition to the idea, and we're still going forward with it."
That was pretty much the same reaction I had. It's kind of funny in a sad way that this is happening at the same time that APA is doing the series on improving communication. Aren't planners supposed to engage with the public early in the process and before making plans? Do as we say, not as we do.Email to APA members. Reading between the lines, the message I get is "We received a lot of email expressing opposition to the idea, and we're still going forward with it."
From the AICP email:I'm sure they think having more professors AICP credentialed gives us more legitimacy but doing it this way does just the opposite..
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.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.
Yikes!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!!!!!
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)....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.
I think that's how most people found out about it; online or through a third pasty at the last minute.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 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.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.
Planning academics have no interest in interacting with practicing planners. The feeling, on my part, is mutual.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.
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.AICP members can get an update on where the issue stands at http://www.planning.org/leadership/fromthecommission/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 firstname.lastname@example.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.