I once heard a story about an architect from New England who was trying to get reciprocity in California many years ago. He studied for the verbal exam for many hours and was quite nervous sitting across from a table of other seasoned architects in San Francisco. He was floored by the only question they asked him: you'll have to forgive me for not remembering it exactly, but it was a complex question dealing with seismic load calculations. He answered simply: I would look it up. He passed the exam.

Architectural education excels at teaching students how to formulate questions and how to find the answers. While NAAB requires accredited schools to comply with certain standards (known as the Conditions and Procedures), they by no means prescribe the pedagogy of each individual school. Administration and faculty are responsible for prescribing the quality and full scope of education for their students.

Internship has no similar structure. The most visible aspect of internship is certainly the Intern Development Program (IDP), and many students graduate into internship naively believing that the IDP equals professional development in a guided manner similar to their formal education. However, as we all know, interns are solely responsible for the completion of the education contained within IDP, and their individual firms harbor none of that responsibility. As a result, many interns are only exposed to the minimum requirements of IDP and are not exposed to broader issues of professional development such as ethics and accountability. Interns who take the initiative to gain this knowledge themselves are often fulfilled, but have little ability to give back to their immediate community.

With this in mind, I begin to question the credibility of the Intern Development Program. It has been said that it's about ensuring young professionals gain exposure to a broad array of topics they will certainly encounter in practice, but over half of them have to switch offices in order to complete the program (that's right - that means many firms do not deal with substantial issues contained within IDP at their firm). In addition, most interns and practitioners agree that education, internship, and completing the ARE does not ensure someone is ready for independent practice. Why, I ask, are we doing all of this?

It's time we revisit ideas of formal internship without preconceived ideas about the Intern Development Program. We've been talking for long enough about what will make internship better - better mentorship, firm buy-in, a better connection between education and practice, etc. We can keep answering these easy questions, or we can start to address the tough ones, and we aren't going to make progress by "putting band-aids on bullet holes." We have an opportunity at this conference to build upon past discussions and discoveries and propose a new, broader, more inclusive model of internship. We've been formulating the questions for years now; it's time begin answering them.

And by the way, the ARE as it stands is anticlimactic.