Architectural Technicians do not exist in France and many other countries

armchairninja

Doesnt it take 5 years just to get to an honours degree in Architecture? or more depending on year out etc.?

Mellor

Chris Arch wrote: »

I have a five years qualification in Arts and Architecture, the equivalent to a master.

My first bit of advice is to find out exactly what qualification you have.
For a start, 5 years of architecture is not a masters. Not in ireland.
Secondly, the content is as important as the time. 5 years Arts and Architecture, may only have enough architectural content to leave it on par with an ordinary degree in Architecture (as this course omits irrelivant points).
This would mean you are, or would of been at graduation, an architectural assistant.
Over time you can of course gain enough exp to obtain part 3 quailification.

Chris Arch

No6 wrote: »

Chris what exactly is the point of this thread? you've obviously spent time looking up definations but there is to my mind no point in getting bogged down in semantics, you dont understand or see the need for Technicians, fair enough, set up your practice and don't employ any and let us know how you get on.

Semantic/language/semiotics are important... A large part of architecture is about communication... If you transmit the wrong message because of a wrong definition, word or sign, you get into trouble... That is what I feel with the term architectural technologist.

It is not that I disregard the qualification or skills of the profession...

muffler

Chris Arch wrote: »

You seem to be very attached to the fact that I am not Irish... Why that?

No, your nationality is irrelevant and I apologise if you read anything like that in my posts.

What I was trying to convey to you was the fact that you are in Ireland now and not France and hence we have different regulations here. What happens in France (or any country) or what titles people work under is of no concern to us in this forum.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

Chris,

so its simply the use of the term 'technician' that you have an issue with??

as i also said above, i would call myself a technical architect, but that is not allowed under the building control act.

Technology and the artistic side of architecture have been separated whether you like it or not, this is apparent in most projects, even on basic dwellings.

I do not expect Architects to know what a Glaser diagram is, what it is in relation to, and what it has to do with building construction, and what it has been updated to. I would expect a technician to know.

I wouldnt expect an architect to know how to show compliance with SI 259 2008... i would expect a technician to know.

Whatever you want to call us, we are:
1. a very valuable part of any construction project
2. a stand alone profession
3. a growing profession
4. the first port of call in any queries related to building science.

You seem not to be even sure yourself... Are you considering your skills as and architectural technician or as an architectural technologist? Is there a difference?

A technique is a procedure used to accomplish a specific activity or task

Technology is a broad concept that deals with an animal species' usage and knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects an animal species' ability to control and adapt to its environment.

I do recognise all your skills and knowledge... But I feel that the term is wrong...

Chris Arch

Mellor wrote: »

My first bit of advice is to find out exactly what qualification you have.
For a start, 5 years of architecture is not a masters. Not in ireland.
Secondly, the content is as important as the time. 5 years Arts and Architecture, may only have enough architectural content to leave it on par with an ordinary degree in Architecture (as this course omits irrelivant points).
This would mean you are, or would of been at graduation, an architectural assistant.
Over time you can of course gain enough exp to obtain part 3 quailification.

I am in contact with the RIAI... Thanks for your advise... I am waiting for the registration board to be created...

Chris Arch

muffler wrote: »

No, your nationality is irrelevant and I apologise if you read anything like that in my posts.

What I was trying to convey to you was the fact that you are in Ireland now and not France and hence we have different regulations here. What happens in France (or any country) or what titles people work under is of no concern to us in this forum.

Appology accepted...

But I do not agree with you... We are in Ireland OK... But if you want to export Irish Architecture like the British and the US do... It is better not to confine your knowledge to the national boundaries...

Mellor

Chris Arch wrote: »

You seem not to be even sure yourself... Are you considering your skills as and architectural technician or as an architectural technologist? Is there a difference?

A technique is a procedure used to accomplish a specific activity or task

Technology is a broad concept that deals with an animal species' usage and knowledge of tools and crafts, and how it affects an animal species' ability to control and adapt to its environment.

Don't get bogged down in the name. A few points.

Technical architect is probably the best name, but it was not originally used as it was appeared to intrude on architects. And now the BAC forbids it.
Technician is the most common used name, but it diminishes the role. Architectural technicians are far more skill that technicians in other fields (such as engineering)
Technologist attempts to elevate skill ATs to a level where they might receive proper recognition. But its a little confusing.

sydthebeat

Chris Arch wrote: »

Are you considering your skills as and architectural technician or as an architectural technologist? Is there a difference?

you cant ask me if I am 'a' or 'b', and then ask if there is a difference between them.

You need to understand that the title of 'Architectural Technician' is not protected, therefore it cannot be defined. The term 'Architectural Technologist' is not protected either, and the only definition lies with the Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists (CIAT) in the UK.

I am not confused at all as to what i am. I am an Architectural Technician, and very proud of that fact as well. I studied and passed a Level 7 'Architectural Technology' course in Bolton St DIT. I am entitled to have the letters Dip. Arch. Tech. after my name.

If you are looking for a definition of what we do.. perhaps read this
http://www.dit.ie/faculties/built/architecture/architectural-technology/career/typeofwork/

As far as the term goes, its what we are stuck with for the time being... if you want to help in the struggle to get our title recognised, defined and protected, join one of the representative bodies such as ATI or CIAT.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

you cant ask me if I am 'a' or 'b', and then ask if there is a difference between them.

You need to understand that the title of 'Architectural Technician' is not protected, therefore it cannot be defined. The term 'Architectural Technologist' is not protected either, and the only definition lies with the Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists (CIAT) in the UK.

I am not confused at all as to what i am. I am an Architectural Technician, and very proud of that fact as well. I studied and passed a Level 7 'Architectural Technology' course in Bolton St DIT. I am entitled to have the letters Dip. Arch. Tech. after my name.

If you are looking for a definition of what we do.. perhaps read this
http://www.dit.ie/faculties/built/architecture/architectural-technology/career/typeofwork/

As far as the term goes, its what we are stuck with for the time being... if you want to help in the struggle to get our title recognised, defined and protected, join one of the representative bodies such as ATI or CIAT.

I hope I do not break any copyright rules by pasting the following:


Working in an architectural practice an architectural technologist are involved in the design process from inception to completion, and with varying levels of input, depending on the technical challenges of each design stage. An architect frequently relies on the technician / technologist to develop planning application CAD drawings based on the architect's architectural design concept. The technician / technologist plays a leading role in developing the design to meet the detailed technical requirements of the building regulations and in preparing an application for a fire safety certificate. Technicians / technologists also play a leading role in developing detailed drawings for tendering purposes, and are actively involved in inspecting the works on site, playing a critically important co-ordination role between the design team and design sub contractors.
Architectural technicians / technologists are involved in both office-based and site-based work. In the office they prepare technical drawings using both traditional drawings skills and 2D and 3D CAD working closely with the architect. They play a technical design role as the project design evolves, frequently working closely with the structural, mechanical and electrical engineers to ensure that these technical areas are successfully absorbed into the finished design. They play a central role in writing technical specifications and ensure that the drawings and specification are fully co-ordinated.
Following the appointment of the main contractor, the architectural technician / technologist again plays a crucial role in co-ordinating the ongoing building design process to reflect the input of specialist design sub contractors, and to respond to the many technical changes which are an inevitable feature of the complex process of building.
Throughout the design and construction process the architectural technician / technologist plays a lead role in assembling, recording and issuing technical documentation to both the design team, the contractor and the client.



I am registered with CITA.... I am amazed that you consider the above as not being part of the architect's skills and work...

Chris Arch

Mellor wrote: »

Don't get bogged down in the name.

But that is what it is all about.

armchairninja

To be fair, an architect can do most of that, to an extent! i.e. they know what it is and that it has to be done, however, the architects main area of expertise is design and making the overall image of the building work.
A technician/technologist however, spends most of their time in education training to deal with the problems behind the image, how the Alabaster wall panels etc. are to be supported, without interupting the flow of the paper mache internal partitions etc.
As was said earlier, set up a practice without any technicians and see how you get on, years ago it may have been possible, but todays education of architecture students has changed significantly, and they are now more focused on image and art, the current architecture students in Bolton St. do approx 1 hour of building tech a week, and frequently they pop they're head into the arch. tech. studios for help with this, if i remember correctly, the current fourth years were still detailing domestic window cills last year :rolleyes:, so its fair to say, they are two very different disciplines, which compliment each other, but the entire project can not be done by either of them on their own!

sydthebeat

Chris Arch wrote: »

. I am amazed that you consider the above as not being part of the architect's skills and work...

To tie this all back the very first posts we made in the art and architecture forum, the architect is expected to have 'adequate knowledge' of these....

Having 'adequate knowledge' and being specifically educated are two very very different things.

I have adequate knowledge of heating systems but I most definitely am not a plumber.....

again....
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59312403&postcount=5

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

To tie this all back the very first posts we made in the art and architecture forum, the architect is expected to have 'adequate knowledge' of these....

Having 'adequate knowledge' and being specifically educated are two very very different things.

again....
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59312403&postcount=5

"Adequate Knowledge", All is about the meaning and interpretation of words, isn't it?... Can you have adequate knowledge withaout being specifically educated?

Whatever... I do not know who within the educative system invented this term but I think that Architectural technologist our technician is a poor definition if related to theory of modern and post modern architecture.

Please no offence...But nothing indicates that a technician is something else than an assistant in the web site you orientated me to: http://www.dit.ie/faculties/built/ar...er/typeofwork/

Mellor

Have you ever actual worked in an irish architectural practice?
Because some of your comments are a little strange. Maybe the practice you worked in didn't use technicians to their full potential, may it only had cad monkeys. But the attitude that somebody is just a technician or a technician is just an assistant is not uncommon, but greatly flawed.

sydthebeat

Chris Arch wrote: »

I hope I do not break any copyright rules by pasting the following:


Working in an architectural practice an architectural technologist are involved in the design process from inception to completion, and with varying levels of input, depending on the technical challenges of each design stage. An architect frequently relies on the technician / technologist to develop planning application CAD drawings based on the architect's architectural design concept. The technician / technologist plays a leading role in developing the design to meet the detailed technical requirements of the building regulations and in preparing an application for a fire safety certificate. Technicians / technologists also play a leading role in developing detailed drawings for tendering purposes, and are actively involved in inspecting the works on site, playing a critically important co-ordination role between the design team and design sub contractors.
Architectural technicians / technologists are involved in both office-based and site-based work. In the office they prepare technical drawings using both traditional drawings skills and 2D and 3D CAD working closely with the architect. They play a technical design role as the project design evolves, frequently working closely with the structural, mechanical and electrical engineers to ensure that these technical areas are successfully absorbed into the finished design. They play a central role in writing technical specifications and ensure that the drawings and specification are fully co-ordinated.
Following the appointment of the main contractor, the architectural technician / technologist again plays a crucial role in co-ordinating the ongoing building design process to reflect the input of specialist design sub contractors, and to respond to the many technical changes which are an inevitable feature of the complex process of building.
Throughout the design and construction process the architectural technician / technologist plays a lead role in assembling, recording and issuing technical documentation to both the design team, the contractor and the client.



I am registered with CITA.... I am amazed that you consider the above as not being part of the architect's skills and work...

lets de-construct this

An architect frequently relies on the technician / technologist to develop planning application CAD drawings based on the architect's architectural design concept.
This is a typical responsibility of a Technician.

The technician / technologist plays a leading role in developing the design to meet the detailed technical requirements of the building regulations and in preparing an application for a fire safety certificate.
Again, a typical Technicians responsibility. Many graduate architects are not 'adequately' versed in Fire regulations to do a FSC application.

Technicians / technologists also play a leading role in developing detailed drawings for tendering purposes, and are actively involved in inspecting the works on site, playing a critically important co-ordination role between the design team and design sub contractors.
There are many Architects who are extremely good at the above, however, this skill is more and more the responsibility of the Technician, especially the 'co-ordination role' between design team and builders.

Architectural technicians / technologists are involved in both office-based and site-based work. In the office they prepare technical drawings using both traditional drawings skills and 2D and 3D CAD working closely with the architect.
This is traditionally the work of an 'architect assistant' or newly graduated architect. But again, as regulation and technology progressed, this work is now undertaken by the Technician.

They play a technical design role as the project design evolves, frequently working closely with the structural, mechanical and electrical engineers to ensure that these technical areas are successfully absorbed into the finished design. They play a central role in writing technical specifications and ensure that the drawings and specification are fully co-ordinated.
IMHO, this is the most important part of the technicians role. This is where he/she can actively input their skills into the project, and show a wide range of technical and material knowledge. Eg the architect specifies a zinc roof, the technician then has to develop, in consultation with the architect, supplier and fitter, the grade of zinc, the type and frequency of fold, the type and frequency of fittings to substrata, the health and safety implications involved in maintainence or repair, etc etc


Following the appointment of the main contractor, the architectural technician / technologist again plays a crucial role in co-ordinating the ongoing building design process to reflect the input of specialist design sub contractors, and to respond to the many technical changes which are an inevitable feature of the complex process of building.
Throughout the design and construction process the architectural technician / technologist plays a lead role in assembling, recording and issuing technical documentation to both the design team, the contractor and the client.
Again, all typical responsibilities of the Technician.


Chris, on reading all of your posts, I feel you simply do not understand the role of the Architectural Technician/Technologist in an architectural practise. That is, i suppose, a reflection of both your educational system and the efforts of Technicians to progress their profession, but i hope you have been educated through your involvement in this forum.

Chris Arch

Mellor wrote: »

Have you ever actual worked in an irish architectural practice?
Because some of your comments are a little strange. Maybe the practice you worked in didn't use technicians to their full potential, may it only had cad monkeys. But the attitude that somebody is just a technician or a technician is just an assistant is not uncommon, but greatly flawed.

I was employed during nearly 6 years in the UK, but I set up my own practice in Dublin in 2000... I have never worked within an irsih practice but once with an Irish architectect in Bristol. I have also worked Australian, canadian, Polish, French, American, German, Nigerian and of course British architects.

I do not understand why you think that an architect assistant would only be used on CAD (please define the term CAD Monkey). An assistant must be able to follow through all the different procedure. helping with the design, the specifications, the tender, and all the other aspects of the works... If I refer to the previous link it is what the technicians do isn't it?

If you compare with other sectors, the technicians are doing the site work/maintenance following the engineer's design and specifications. But this is not true regading your profession...

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

lets de-construct this

An architect frequently relies on the technician / technologist to develop planning application CAD drawings based on the architect's architectural design concept.
This is a typical responsibility of a Technician.

The technician / technologist plays a leading role in developing the design to meet the detailed technical requirements of the building regulations and in preparing an application for a fire safety certificate.
Again, a typical Technicians responsibility. Many graduate architects are not 'adequately' versed in Fire regulations to do a FSC application.

Technicians / technologists also play a leading role in developing detailed drawings for tendering purposes, and are actively involved in inspecting the works on site, playing a critically important co-ordination role between the design team and design sub contractors.
There are many Architects who are extremely good at the above, however, this skill is more and more the responsibility of the Technician, especially the 'co-ordination role' between design team and builders.

Architectural technicians / technologists are involved in both office-based and site-based work. In the office they prepare technical drawings using both traditional drawings skills and 2D and 3D CAD working closely with the architect.
This is traditionally the work of an 'architect assistant' or newly graduated architect. But again, as regulation and technology progressed, this work is now undertaken by the Technician.

They play a technical design role as the project design evolves, frequently working closely with the structural, mechanical and electrical engineers to ensure that these technical areas are successfully absorbed into the finished design. They play a central role in writing technical specifications and ensure that the drawings and specification are fully co-ordinated.
IMHO, this is the most important part of the technicians role. This is where he/she can actively input their skills into the project, and show a wide range of technical and material knowledge. Eg the architect specifies a zinc roof, the technician then has to develop, in consultation with the architect, supplier and fitter, the grade of zinc, the type and frequency of fold, the type and frequency of fittings to substrata, the health and safety implications involved in maintainence or repair, etc etc


Following the appointment of the main contractor, the architectural technician / technologist again plays a crucial role in co-ordinating the ongoing building design process to reflect the input of specialist design sub contractors, and to respond to the many technical changes which are an inevitable feature of the complex process of building.
Throughout the design and construction process the architectural technician / technologist plays a lead role in assembling, recording and issuing technical documentation to both the design team, the contractor and the client.
Again, all typical responsibilities of the Technician.


Chris, on reading all of your posts, I feel you simply do not understand the role of the Architectural Technician/Technologist in an architectural practise. That is, i suppose, a reflection of both your educational system and the efforts of Technicians to progress their profession, but i hope you have been educated through your involvement in this forum.

Sydthebeat,

I think that you understood what I tryed to say but you think that my view is conflicting with your interests/qualification... May interfer with the protection of another title in architecture...

I did not have any intention to damage your proffession. I just wanted to explain that architecture can not be dissociated from its techniques and tehnologies, and that for this reason the term architectural technician/technologist is very inadequate...

There is no point to continue this conversation further.

Mellor

Chris Arch wrote: »

I do not understand why you think that an architect assistant would only be used on CAD (please define the term CAD Monkey). An assistant must be able to follow through all the different procedure. helping with the design, the specifications, the tender, and all the other aspects of the works... If I refer to the previous link it is what the technicians do isn't it?

A cad monkey is someody who does the drawing, with out any techinical imput to the design, often just making changes to work already carried out. Simply work that even a monkey could do, hence the name.

By assistant, I was refer to the fact that the Technician is not merely a tool of the architect, I wasn't refering to architectural assistants

topcatcbr

Cad Technician (Cad Monkey) Some one with little or no construction knowledge but has a good understanding on how to draught using cad.

armchairninja

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_4mZiD_NUk

Sorry, but couldn't resist:p

sydthebeat

Chris Arch wrote: »

I just wanted to explain that architecture can not be dissociated from its techniques and tehnologies, and that for this reason the term architectural technician/technologist is very inadequate...

There is no point to continue this conversation further.

That is your opinion, which you are entitled to have, but you factually incorrect in this opinion. The profession has separated into the design architect and the technical architect. These technical architects are called Architectural Technicians / Technologists.

By your logic all Architects are Technicians, which is completely false.

We will agree to disagree.

ben bedlam

Mellor wrote: »

To be honest he is just annoyed that his class was the first to graduate into the recession.

Ben Bedlam, I know its annoying, but the trouble you have finding work is not a flaw of the AT course or the profession. Its accross the board.

I have a secure job as an AT. My point is, it is a horrible profession, and I look forward in a few weeks to submitting my notice and never, EVER, going back to this horrific work again

armchairninja

ben bedlam wrote: »

I have a secure job as an AT. My point is, it is a horrible profession, and I look forward in a few weeks to submitting my notice and never, EVER, going back to this horrific work again

How did you not realise your hatred for the profession and the type of work long before finishing 3 years studying it?

pseudo-tech

ben bedlam wrote: »

I have a secure job as an AT. My point is, it is a horrible profession, and I look forward in a few weeks to submitting my notice and never, EVER, going back to this horrific work again

Why do you feel it is a horrible profession? Do you find it difficult and what will you do instead?

jozi

ben bedlam wrote: »

I have a secure job as an AT. My point is, it is a horrible profession, and I look forward in a few weeks to submitting my notice and never, EVER, going back to this horrific work again

You went through 3 years of hell (for lack of a better word) only to come on here, fully qualified, and say its a horrible profession :rolleyes:

I wish you all the best I your next chosen career path.

Chris Arch

sydthebeat wrote: »

That is your opinion, which you are entitled to have, but you factually incorrect in this opinion. The profession has separated into the design architect and the technical architect. These technical architects are called Architectural Technicians / Technologists.

By your logic all Architects are Technicians, which is completely false.

We will agree to disagree.

By your logic all technicians are the same, which is a non sense...

Technology is part of architecture and architects need technical ability/knowledge to design, comunicate, specify... I am sure that it is a very valuable option to have a so called technician dealing with construction design and details... But an architect unable to carry out this part of the work should not be permitted to call himself/herself an architect.... And someone able to carry out this part of the works as well as having skills such as hand drafting, planning, health and saftey, etc... shall be able to call himself/herself an architect...

pseudo-tech

Chris Arch wrote: »

Technology is part of architecture and architects need technical ability/knowledge to design, comunicate, specify... I am sure that it is a very valuable option to have a so called technician dealing with construction design and details... But an architect unable to carry out this part of the work should not be permitted to call himself/herself an architect....

You have just condemned a large number of [qualified] Architects here in Ireland.

Chris Arch wrote: »

And someone able to carry out this part of the works as well as having skills such as hand drafting, planning, health and saftey, etc... shall be able to call himself/herself an architect...

Feck i'm an Architect!

sydthebeat

Chris Arch wrote: »

By your logic all technicians are the same, which is a non sense...

absolutely not, and you will not find any evidence in any of my posts that holds this opinion...

Chris Arch wrote: »

But an architect unable to carry out this part of the work should not be permitted to call himself/herself an architect.... And someone able to carry out this part of the works as well as having skills such as hand drafting, planning, health and saftey, etc... shall be able to call himself/herself an architect...

Your opinion,...... but again, not one held by the Irish and UK third Level Educational systems, Uk and Irish Architectural Representative Bodies or the Irish and UK Architectural profession as a whole.

sinnerboy

Structural Engineers , Quantity Surveyors , M+E Engineers , Fire Safety Consultants , Planning Consultants , and Architectural Technicians - all work closely with the Architect

The Architect is often expected to be many things - but the built environment is too complex for one profession alone.

The Architectural Technician is just one reflection of this reality .

Maybe this is not the perception in France . But it is here .

OP - The smartest thing you have said was a couple of posts back when you signaled an end to this discussion .