Jay, I too provide LARE Review Sessions and am about to do another one next week in Omaha, Nebraska. In the almost 10 years which I have been conducting review sessions, I have found that each candidate has a different hardest section that they just can’t get past. Traditionally they have a better chance at passing A & B their first time…though that comes with a fairly good understanding of the professional practice and contracts and responsibilities (Section A). Section D is half/half…candidates get a little too confident in what they think they know about materials, their attachements and uses. The graphic sections are a skill of being able to master the requirements (explicit and implicit) within the allotted time…the time can make this the most challenging, and thus the reason a prep course or review session with mock exams is very important. Sounds like you will not be able to get into the June Graphic sections, since you haven’t made a choice as to which to take…it is likely too late to get enrolled to sit for the June exam. I will be at the FLASLA annual meeting and can give you more insight to prepare for the sections…let me know if you want to meet up then and I can bring some info with me to the conference.
Since your first chance to apply and get enrolled for the exam will be for the MC sections in Sept, take A & B first. This should help build up your confidence and then Section C in December. Then next March take D and then next June take E.
Check out CLARB’s exam content where it tells you the percentage of topics and subtopics and critique yourself for your knowledge skills and abilities in these topics, then most importantly talk to your colleagues and contracters and pick their brains about what you feel less confident about.
Section E is the most difficult, generally followed by Section C. However, last december the pass rate for C was higher than for D, which was unusual.
The 3 year rule (or 3 fail rule) generally applies only in Jersey or Massachusetts. Don’t think you have a limit in Florida, but obviously you can research this yourself.
In my opinion, you are better off taking the easier sections first…but this may vary from person to person based on what your experience and predilictions are like.
As for prep resources, the range available is considerable. I’ve no personal experience with either the Georgia or Florida reviews, but I believe that they are pretty general. I think Georgia offers a somewhat more intensive review for C&E once a year and their other review is more of an overview. Florida’s appears to be an overview.
The reviews I do in Northern California are as intense as they get, outside of the grading class at Cornell, which is ten days long and very expensive.
As for the study books, the PPI series is pretty good, if out of date relative to the current exam specs. (Exceptions: Acomb’s book and the newer (4 vig) section C exam which I believe are up to date). Morrison is kind of questionable, and useless for the performance sections. IMO the vignettes in Chaffee’s book from Wiley are way too easy.
I’m in Florida and looking to take the exam for the first time. I can’t afford to register for all of the sections, but I was thinking of starting with C and E. I have two questions for anyone who is so enlightened as to answer them:
1) If I can only take two sections, does it really matter which two I start with?
2) What is the best way to prepare? Any particular study guides in particular? Are the prep courses a necessity? (I noticed florida only seems to have one, whereas Georgia looks to have a better course).
Thanks
Thanks for your reply and Nicks too. This is part of my dilemma for my thesis presentation in June and yes its a big project…I didnt know I would have scale issue until you start doing the process. I wanted to show the 6 miles of watershed of the design details along its route that i did, but I guess in order to do that, I would have to have at lease a 100 scale drawing. If i do that for the 6 miles, it would take 8 boards because i would have to sort of connect the boards to show the watershed masterplan and that is way too many boards just for that, but it would look cool. But yes, I would have a lot of space or context if i print out 42×30. Hmmmm….so I was thinking perhaps I would trim out a lot of the context, but show enough, which the design would be 15×42 and that would give me enough at the bottom of the design to show enlargements, sections etc. So, I would still have 8 boards for the masterplan, but have enough room to show other stuff on the boards. Does this make sense?? or is there a better way?
Jim:
Some ASLA members around the state have some small study groups. I don’t know where you are located, but if I did,
I might be able to give you a contact. At the May seminar you will get alot of info to study from, but if you want some of that earlier, like now, then contact Emily O’Mahoney (I think you registered through her), and she may be able to copy some of the handouts early for you to practice on. One final suggestion. If you know of anyone that took the sections at the most recent time Dec. 2008, get with them and see if they can remember some of the problems from those exams. Even if they don’t remember everything, it will be a good place to start with information to direct your study. For example if they remember a problem on ballfields and flood plains, you can study that. ask some of the licensed professionals you might work with etc. Mike
Daniel,
Perhaps you took the wrong prep course. 🙂 I offer three (3-day) classes covering the LARE, and have been teaching reviews for 10 years. And I stay CURRENT with the exam (to the extent possible). If you want a brochure, e-mail me at rayfreeman3@comcast.net.
LARE is a test, not an entity. The entities involved in the process are CLARB, the ASLA, state ASLA chapters, and universities or extension programs. There are 3 (to my knowledge) “private” entities….PPI, Morrison Media, and Freeman & Jewell. I’m the latter. Morrison can’t help you with the performance sections. The PPI book on Section E is out of date….it doesn’t really touch on pond design and grading.
Right now there is no “authority”. In fact, most people involved in the process outside of CLARB staff and State Licensing Board staff are volunteer professionals.
I do what I do because:
1. I like it.
2. I’m good at it. and
3. I care about my students.
Ray
Anyone else studying for sections C,E and F in the Jacksonville area. I would like to get a study group going or join into one that already exists. I have plenty of info. for sections C and E, but none for section F.
If anyone is interested in having Studio L-2 offered in Spring 2010, a petition is being circulated. A Spring 2010 section would allow those of us who are taking L-1 in the Fall to continue on into L-2 without having to wait an entire year. In order to add the class, however, administration wants assurance that the Fall 2009 section, as it is currently offered in the catalog, will continue to draw enough students so that it is not cancelled. We’re asking that students interested in both sections sign the petition. We currently have lots of signatures for those interested in taking a Spring 2010 section if it is offered. We need more signatures, however, for people planning to enroll in Fall 2009. Thanks for your interest!
My only “real complaint” about the process is that neither LARE nor CLARB seem to be on the same page as anyone else who is administering practice material or study courses. I bought the PPI books, took the UCLA prep courses for C & E, came across piles of study material from colleagues and past test takers…and really studied it. A lot. For months. Then I took all 5 sections and realized that 90% of what I had studied wasn’t tested on the exam. Not that it was the end of the world, after all I had learned a lot in the previous months even though I had nothing tangible to show for it.
While taking the UCLA course, the professor even stated that LARE frowned upon the prep courses because they didn’t want other courses offering up tests which were similar to those that are administered in the exam. So, my question is…why doesn’t CLARB or LARE or ASLA…or someone with “authority” in the matter not step in and regulate the prep courses? Why can’t LARE offer prep courses for these exams, where they could teach and demonstrate practical knowledge needed for the exams? I would take a LARE prep course over a 3rd-party course, if they were offered. Plus, it could be another avenue for them to take our money…it’s win-win!!
Jeffrey, This has been the case with the exam for some time… even when we had to draw planting plans in one section. They would still ask questions in the multiple choice sections about plants and planting design. One thing you can be sure about the exam…you will be asked to show that you know the content in more than one way in many of the topics, because in some cases, you could guess your way through some of the questions, but when asked in other situations, you may show your lack of knowledge, skills or ability. If you really did know the content, they will see that in correct responses consistently, rather than a lucky guess once and a wrong response later. Generally the plant questions will give you a large amount of plants to choose from and more than one plant could have been right, based on your geographic location…but I would suspect the computers would not discern that you were answering from the SE United States and you actually chose a plant tolerant to the SW United States (it would just recognize that the plant you chose was either one of the correct or incorrect choices). Best of luck in the exam process!
Versailles is well worth a visit once in a lifetime. It’s grand and over the top, but classic. You’ll get a good sense of what Andre LeNotre’s great shaft of space means. I agree that unless you’re really into Baroque interiors, skip the indoor door. When I was there with friends we had a picnic in the gardens, along with hundreds of other people. There are other spaces well worth visiting, as well: Jardins des Buttes Chaumonts near Pere LaChaise cemetary, which is well worth a visit. Also Viaduct des Artes (an interesting raised planted walkway), Parc Andre Citroen (a must see!!!), canal St. Martin, Jardins du Luxembourg (more classic), the architecture inside the Institut du Monde Arab is amazing. There’s lots of large and small plazas, which one stumbles upon just by wandering around Paris. Paris is easy to visit as a tourist since many major roads radiate out from plazas. There’s a great pocket mapbook you can get in any bookstore in Paris called “Paris Par Arrondisements”. Paris is divided up into sections called arrondisements and the book logically follows the city plan. It includes Metro stops and points of interest. Have a great trip!
Well I am not from New Jersey so I can’t speak to the specifics of your state. However, you should read the eligibility requirements as listed on the CLARB website. If you have a degree in Landscape Architecture from Rutgers and the program is LAAC accredited you are eligible to sit for Sections A, B and D of the exam. In a lot of states you can sit for the exam prior to having the necessary experience under your belt you just can’t get the actualy registration until you have satisfied the required probationary period of practicing under a Licensed LA. If I were you I would apply and take the multiple choice sections to get those out of the way. I would also suggest you start preparing for the graphic portions as well. Not everyone passes the first time, if you do great, but if you dont you will still keep working and hopefully by the time you complete your exam you will have fulfilled the work requirements too. Good Luck.
My story is a long one, but I’ll abbreviate the best I can. I applied to take the L.A.R.E. in 2006. I foolishly signed up and paid for all 5 sections at once and as exam time approached, I realized there was no way I could be ready for any of them.
In fact, I’m in IL and really don’t need a license to do what I do, but figured I’d just do it anyway, so there really was no urgency. I asked for a refund and they suggested I could roll over to the next session. Well, here it is 3 years later and I’ve come to realize I really will not ever take the exam. I’ve been in the industry for 20 years and never had a need before, so I formally requested a refund. I figure they have had use of my money for 3 years. They had virtually no cost outlay, so no harm, no foul, right?
Guess what? Seems, buried deep down within the bowels of CLARB’s malfunctioning, poorly-designed website is a no-refund policy. This policy was not located any where near any of the sign up pages. If it were, it would have shown up on the pages I printed out when I signed up online.
If my business, if I took someone’s money and didn’t deliver product, I’d be accused of being a thief. That’s what this feels like.
I’m pursuing the state now, but getting stonewalled there too. I’m out $1500 and have nothing to show for it.
If you would like the names of the individuals I dealt with at CLARB, I will gladly share.
This stinks big time. BEWARE OF CLARB!
I’m going to try taking the mult. choice sections this fall for the 1st time and would love any help. If you could send me that pdf file that would be great. matthew.durkovich@jacobs.com
It seems like it is because architecture projects are getting more complicated and can’t be adequately rendered with hand whereas landscape projects, for the most part, seemed stalled in the past.
It would have been ludicrous to render the Bird’s Nest stadium in Beijing by hand, you would have to do a million different angles. Let alone design it by hand. That project had to be designed in 3D and was helped immensely by BIM modeling (Digital Projects). Can you imagine how many sections you would have had to draw through that thing in the past to get it built?
Take current architecture projects and compare them to 50 years ago, there is quite a bit of difference. Now take landscape projects and compare them to 50 years ago, not such a big gap. To me we are stalled designwise and this has led to a standstill in the use of technology as well.
